Jackson Free Press

4. You shop at Video Library or Video Café before you go near Blockbuster.

5. You look forward to the Convention Center more than your birthday.
6. The Mayflower is not just something Pilgrims rode on.
7. You think Kamikaze and David Banner are cooler than Lil Jon and Usher.
8. When you think downtown, you think rental property, not crime cesspool.
9. Your idea of fun is a King Elementary concert.
10. You'd rather have a Tony DiFatta, Ellen Langford or William Goodman painting than a Van Gogh in your living room.
11. You know that a vegetarian (Al Stamps) makes the best and beefiest burger in town.
12. You know that "Smith Robertson" is not hyphenated (it's a man's name).

Previous Commentsshow

ladd, aren't you watching the inaugural? Trent centerstage? I am waiting for some action, but shoulder to shoulder, it looks like a police state to me...and , hey , is that the prez's hand? are you trying to takes our minds off this day?? you did not mention the SPQ's and High Noon. #10 for sure.

sunshine

Jan 20 2005

No, sunshine, I have no interest in the inauguration this time. You bring back memories, though. Four years ago, I covered it for the Village Voice, and it was miserable and raining, and they were trying to hide the thousands of protesters. They herd people back behind the Capitol right in front of the Supreme Court with a big line-up of buses coughing out exhaust. But it didn't stop the protests: everyone from Al Sharpton to Carolyn Goodman (Andrew Goodman's mother) were lined up back there protesting amid Texans hurrying back wearing big mink coats and big hair (the women) and cowboy boots with their suits and hats (the men). I will never forget that day -- it was so incredibly depressing and, indeed, sent us down a very dark path. But it won't last forever. We just have to hit bottom first.

DonnaLadd

Jan 20 2005

Also, thanks for the suggestions on the Jacksonian list. Everyone feel free to add your choices. We threw this one together in the newsroom in the middle of the nigh. Twas fun, though.

DonnaLadd

Jan 20 2005

oops! I think #10 should be Ellen Langford....shouldn't it? Or is there an Ellen Goodman I've not yet discovered?

casey

Jan 27 2005

So living in Jackson for 40 years does not qualify? This is the type of fluff piece that is characteristic of the self-absorbed staff of the JFP. If a person frequents certain establishments or listens to specific artists (which Donna Ladd and her ilk deem "hip", being that they are the arbiters of such), he/she is a real Jacksonian. Nonsense. Real Jacksonians are those of us who have stayed in the city, making our lives here while others were moving off to New York to write for the Village Voice. Sorry, but I don't eat at Hal & Mal's often enough to pass your stringent standards. I don't look forward to a convention center that will be a money loser and host nothing more than family reunions and jacuzzi expos. The only Ellen Goodman I'm familar with is a columnist for the Boston Globe. I have no idea who Kamikaze is and there are zillions of things I'd rather do for fun than go to a concert, especially one by King Elementary. I guess that makes me an "un-hip loser." (pick your own sneering, ad hominem insult from one of Donna's columns). But this is just a light piece meant to highlight unique aspects of the city! Maybe, but it smacks of the arrogant, navel-gazing, smarmy attitude that permeates the entire publication. Forgive me, but I'm offended by someone who left for greener pastures, only to return as a cultural carpetbagger set on enlightening us backward hicks, telling me what qualifications one must possess to be a Jacksonian. In my book someone who has spent their entire life living, working, raising children, attending church, and dying in the city is a hell of a lot more qualified to carry the title "Jacksonian" than a twentysomething "artist" who moved to town 2 years ago and hangs out places ordained by a free alternative.

Jethr0

Jan 27 2005

"Cultural carpetbagger"? Cool. I'll add that to the list of groovy names people call me. However, my favorite is still the bitter label, "hip-hop editor," as posted by Richard Barrett on his Web site. ;-) Jethro, my suggestion is that you simply stop reading the paper and putting yourself through such misery.

DonnaLadd

Jan 27 2005

Casey, that's funny that we're just now noticing that we morphed Ellen Langford and William Goodman into the same person. (Sounds like a Talk spoof!) I fixed it above -- just in time to put up this issue's Talks. Apologies to them both, and a certain liberal Boston columnist chick.

DonnaLadd

Jan 27 2005

In other words, those who do not march in lockstep with us need not speak up. We don't want to hear what you have to say, you un-hip loser! This is the attitude of the editor of the Jackson "Free" Press. Apparently, that's free as in the cost only.

Jethr0

Jan 27 2005

Didn't say that, Dude. You can think anything you want about me -- the damned "cultural carpetbagger" -- or the JFP. But it sounded like the paper was discombobulating you so much that you needed to be reminded that it's a free country, and all you have to do is not read it. You're "free" not to pick it up. And I will remind you that the phrase "un-hip loser" was used only to refer to people who go around whining about the city's problems all the time without participating in positive actions to fix the problems. Decide for yourself it it applies to you.

DonnaLadd

Jan 27 2005

HAW HAW HAW!

Jay

Jan 27 2005

Jethro, excuse me, JethrO -- capital o -- or is it Jethr0 -- zero? Anyway, could you consider acting like the adult you must be if you've lived in Jackson for 40 years? Smell the roses, why don't you, and be glad you live in America where all have the right to decide for themselves what makes any thing at all -- a Jacksonian, even. And all have the right to read it, if it's published, mull it over and think for themselves. That's what we're about at the JFP -- helping people make informed decisions for themselves about topics that impact their daily lives. Actually, that's a tenet all media should hold dear. Like the editor of the Jackson Free press suggested, you could make the decision not to continue to read the paper since your comments make it sound like the JFP's information binds you so tightly. Give it some thought.

Lynette Hanson

Jan 27 2005

Rationalize your snide, vitriolic tone any way you please, dude. The simple fact is that your writings are contemptuous of those who take opposing views. You say that talking down the city talks us all down. The city is not a bunch of buildings and festivals. The city is people, including (much to your chagrin) those who have spent their entire lives here and have earned the right to criticize a city administration that is more concerned about putting new benches on Farish Street and renaming the airport than curbing crime. By referring to them pejoratively as "un-hip losers" or whatever insult du jour you choose, you are equally talking us all down. And I would say voting and paying taxes rather than fleeing the city qualifies as doing something to fix things...certainly more than attending the Fondren Artist's Collective Folk Festival and Vegan Banquet. Thanks for the civics lesson, but it seems that you need to be reminded that it is indeed a free country, and if you are going to avail yourself of said freedoms by writing your opinion down, duplicating it, and placing it all over the city for people to read, then you have to be prepared for someone to avail himself of his freedoms by objecting. The response, "just don't read it," is a cop out and a rather unsophisticated retort. Or is it that you only want to hear the opinions of your small circle of friends and acquaintances? I still take issue with your assertion that this list is what constitutes a Jacksonian. How long have you lived here, again?

Jethr0

Jan 27 2005

That's it, Jethr0! I hereby challenge you to a duel: meet me in the parking lot outside Hal & Mal's tonight at midnight and let's see who's left standing: never-left-angry-Jacksonian or Ladd-the-optimistic-Cultural-Carpetbagger. And watch out, by the way, for Mama Hen Hansen. She's older and has more insurance.

DonnaLadd

Jan 27 2005

It's a zero, because I tried to register with an o, but the e-mail address I used wasn't working and I couldn't change it. You can cast aspersions upon me all you want, suggesting that my criticism of this piece and the paper at large are childish, but you only make my point about the attitude the staff of this paper has toward those who don't parrot its opinions. Perhaps you could refrain from employing an insulting tone. Not that I expected a open-minded response. One does not normally encounter such when he dares stir the waters of a sycophantic klatsch. I pick up the JFP occasionally. I'm amazed that the people on the staff would prefer I didn't. I'm usually just thumb through it, but when I read the bit above I decided to respond. I would remind you that (speaking as one who is eminently glad he lives in America) I have that right, also. Oh, and I have given it some thought...that's why I responded. I'm not sure if this was another subtle, backhanded insult to presume I don't think, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Of course, if criticism is unwelcome, let me know. I'll leave and the JFP can go back to writing for its chosen few. It seems with all the, "just don't read it!" responses (3 so far), that those with divergent views are not encouraged to participate.

Jethr0

Jan 27 2005

Pistols or rapiers? Or perhaps a war of words? Three mentions of my phrase! I must've struck a nerve. Either that or it's tantamount to a tacit approval. Oh, and please give me directions to Hal & Mal's. I'm not sure I can find my way there. ;-)

Jethr0

Jan 27 2005

haw haw haw! jethrO... i honestly don't think that this list of what makes one a jacksonian was meant to be authoritative, conclusive, or altogether serious. i consider myself a jacksonian but i don't own any chane or blockwear stuff. c'mon, man! and seriously. leaving to go to college and check out other parts of the country isn't 'fleeing.' how long have you been reading the JFP? i would wager not too long. as far as the city administration goes, why don't you run for city council instead of whining about it on this blog? you can run on a strong platform of NO NEW BENCHES ANYWHERE UNTIL CRIME IS GONE!!! see, most thinking people know how to do more than one thing simultaneously. and running a city like this ain't no cakewalk. but seriously - go for it! give it a try! do SOMETHING besides come here and whine and complain about the paper and it's readers and viewpoints. as i saw it put so eloquently on a certain other local blog recently: what the hell are you still doing here??? get out!!! if it pains you so much that we're doing what we do, then LEAVE!!! and i mean that as sincerely as possible.

Jay

Jan 27 2005

I kind of like the zero. It's, well, kinda hip. Jethr0, I always welcome constructive criticism, and have made many changes to the paper and the site over the last couple year as a result. However, your postings here, so far, are so filled with vitriol directed at me and the staff that it's hard to take you seriously. Clearly, I hit a nerve with you, and I apologize. But, lighten up a bit and just have a conversation. Otherwise, I'm gonna keep ribbin' you, Dude. If you'd care to take a breath, and discuss specific issues, then you're welcome to do that. You'd probably be surprised to find that folks around take to that pretty well. ;-)

DonnaLadd

Jan 27 2005

Pistols or rapiers? Or perhaps a war of words? I prefer a hot-pink water-Uzi, actually. ;-) Not a nerve, exactlyóyou're just kinda fun.

DonnaLadd

Jan 27 2005

to clarify, and to reiterate what the author of the post on the other blog meant: you are welcome to read, browse, post, whatever. but you know what the tone is gonna be over here. you're not going to convince me in a million years that being oversensitive about a stupid top ten piece is okay, and that the people who run this paper are being insensitive to common folks who don't live in fondren. i could pick up that local christian family magazine and find TONS of stuff that would set me off. and they might have a blog and i could go there and holler and carry on. and they might ban me. they might pray for me or something. i might feel smug and justified in my little battle. but honestly, it wouldn't matter. that local christian family paper isn't going to bend to my whims and start adding articles representative of other faiths. and i would hope to high heaven that it wouldn't. that would be the apex of lunacy - to agree with and cater to a loose cannon on a weblog?? jeepers! (i am a loose cannon 99% of the time, BTW) i DO love serious discussions, though. good natured ones between well-informed folks who aren't going to change their minds, but who can respect another viewpoint. come have a beer. forget the duel. it'll be fun.

Jay

Jan 27 2005

Jay, I'm going to pray for you ;) Very good point with how absolutely difficult it must be to run the city of Jackson. I LOVE the new, fun stuff in the JFP. I especially loved this week's six degrees with Spit McGee. And I fully understand that since my dog Zeke was NOT included that it does not make him less of a dog.

emilyb

Jan 27 2005

Jethr0: "simple fact is that your writings are contemptuous of those who take opposing views". Philip: Iíve seen that attitude from the areaís natives as well: those with opposing points of view have to be weird, stupid, or evil. Therefore, my criticisms of die-hard traditionalists are just as valid (in your own mind) as yours are of the JFP Jethr0: ìÖmy criticism of this piece and the paper at large are childishÖî Philip: I agree with the other posters -- they ARE childish. One of the key markers of immaturity is the failure to take a respectful tone toward those who oppose you, even if they do seem ìcontemptuousî toward you (personally, as a multigenerational Deep Southerner mind you, I think our cultureís definition of ìcontemptî is too broad, not just about those with different viewpoints. But thatís a whole other story) Jethr0: ...those who have spent their entire lives here and have earned the right to criticize a city administration...î (emphasis mine) Philip: What gives a person THE RIGHT to criticize is NOT the length of residency...it's the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION!!!! Furthermore, what gives a Jacksonian a duty to criticize such and such is CITIZENSHIP (meaning, legally registered to vote in Jackson). To be perfectly blunt, that mindset is more appropriate for a dictatorship than for a democracy. I hope you realize this makes you look like some hostile anti-outsider type; which in turn makes you look extremely provincial. Jethr0: ì... greener pasturesÖ cultural carpetbagger.. qualifications for a ìreal Jacksonianî Philip: And Iím offended by your suggestion that those who havenít lived in Jackson (let alone Mississippi) ought not have the right to speak their mind about what they think of the city ñ both good and bad (recall my Constitution remarks) . I hate to break the news to you, but great cities and nations are great NOT because of what the native-born do, but because of ìoutsidersî moving to a city do. This is not to say that native-born are not able to do great things. Itís that cities that the most enriching cities are those that welcome ìoutsidersî who bring in different points of view. Let me make a challenge to you: contact the Miss. Museum of Art or anyone else you know would have an encyclopedic knowledge of art. Ask that person how many of the greatest artists of ANY time period did their best works in the immediate area in which they were born. You might be shocked. Jethr0: In other words, those who do not march in lockstep with us need not speak up. We don't want to hear what you have to say, you un-hip loser! Philip: Read the Clinton LeSeuer and other threads and tell us where weíve been disrespectful of MBrady (a discussion ìopponentî). Then get back with me later. Otherwise, I will automatically assume that you are easily offended anyone who expresses differing points of view ñ even if polite about it.

Philip

Jan 27 2005

the list is supposed to be like.. if you do any of these, not all of them, so you're safe, jay, not wearing chane or blockwear ;)

casey

Jan 27 2005

Jay: ...leaving to go to college and check out other parts of the country isn't 'fleeing.' Philip: Well, there's Millsaps and Belhaven - both the precincts in which had 40% and over support for Kerry -- and over 40% opposition to the Marriage Amendment besides (in the Millsaps precinct, the Marriage Amendment almost passed -- 49%, if you can believe it). Kerry got just as many votes as well. Somehow, though, I get the feeling that Jethr0 wouldn't count those places -- too anti-traditional for his taste (I presume).

Philip

Jan 27 2005

haw haw haw! my dad is now checking this site and has sent me an email reminding me of my manners... which is awesome. i'm gonna keep on keepin on, for the time being. ps: www.catoptric.com

Jay

Jan 28 2005

the laughter approximation* isn't mine, for the record. but i think it's greatness. * "haw haw haw!" and/or "HAW HAW!"

Jay

Jan 28 2005

Anybody wanna figure out how many logical fallacies Mr. Bodine committed? Go to the http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/comments.php?id=5010_0_27_0_C (the Post-Roe board) for links to some sites.

Philip

Jan 28 2005

Philip, I puzzled for a few minutes over who Mr. Bodine was. Then it dawned on me. You are a bad boy. ;-)

DonnaLadd

Jan 28 2005

I puzzled over it for a few minutes, too, because Bodine is Beau-dine in NASCAR, as in the names of a trio of brothers who race -- Geoffrey, Todd and Brett.

Lynette Hanson

Jan 28 2005

thanks Philip, just read your comment about whether those who are not native-born have a right to speak about the city and the state. gotta love that Constitution! (well, it's not perfect but a good starting point. as my daughter recently remarked , 'it was the founding FATHERS, for pete's sake. ' good point. and who knows how it will get fiddled with in the next 4 yrs. and on. sigh. )

sunshine

Jan 28 2005

Well, I tried to respond to the plethora comments here, but this website has a limit of 3000 characters/post and I was well over 4500 when I hit preview. When I went back from the warning message to the edit page, the entire thing was gone, and I'm too tired to rewrite it now. I'll try again later this weekend. Just one thing, Philip - where exactly did I say that the JFP and/or its staff do not have the right to speak about the city? I ask you that because over half of your diatribe is based upon that faulty premise.

Jethr0

Jan 29 2005

Reading this thread made my stomach churn. Two of the largest signs of intelligence and respectability are the ability to take criticism well and to find the best points in an opponent's arguments, rather than looking for weak points or worse, responding to the manner of presentation. Jethro's original comment could definitely be critiqued for presentation, but concentrating on the form, rather than the content, is a sure sign of hiding from the truth. Philip asks if they have been disrespectful to MBrady. As far as I know, no they haven't, because her arguments are more easily rebutted than Jethro's, and so there's no need to hide. Another example: Jethro said: "The city is people...who have spent their entire lives here and have earned the right to criticize a city administration...." And Philip turned this into saying that those from outside the city don't have the right to critize the city, when that is obviously not what Jethro meant. Or Ladd's histrionic response to Jethro's supposed histrionic comment: stop reading! Again, avoiding the content--the navel gazing criticism. Oh, yeah, and then she challenged him to a duel! (talk about HAW HAW, jay) Watch out Jethro, next time you post something else she can't respond to, she's going to call you a troll like she did me. I've been here for about a decade, and don't meet any of the criteria on the list really (and I shop at Walmart for the stuff that's cheaper there!), nor do any of my closest friends that grew up here, nor my dad nor his family, nor the majority of Jackson. The list really should be called, "You are a Fondrenian/JFP fellow traveler if..." I mean, come one, this list excludes the majority of Jackson, but includes the majority of the JFP readership, esp. those that identify strongly with the paper. Sure, it's a 'fun' thing, but I think it's definitely fair to say it displays a certain navel gazing attitude.

jason

Jan 29 2005

First, an apology to Jethr0. It certainly was inappropriate for me to call you "Mr. Bodine". I can certainly see how one can take it to mean "you are a hick". That is not what I meant by it. I only played on the name of a well-known character who was/is truly humorous (NOT a euphamism) -- "country-fied" or not. It's that your tone really hit a nerve with me - an attitude reminiscent of what I experienced all too often in the area's attitudes during my youth[*] -- like it, keep your mouth shut, or leave actually; plus a lot of what's called "the culture of honor" attitude to boot. Still, that's no excuse for my "Mr. Bodine" remark, and again, I'm sorry for my personalized snideness. [*] Actually I grew up and attended college in North Louisiana, but it's culture is virtually indistinguishable from Mississippi's.

Philip

Jan 29 2005

Jethr0: Just one thing, Philip - where exactly did I say that the JFP and/or its staff do not have the right to speak about the city? I ask you that because over half of your diatribe is based upon that faulty premise. Jason: Another example: Jethro said: "The city is people...who have spent their entire lives here and have earned the right to criticize a city administration...." And Philip turned this into saying that those from outside the city don't have the right to critize the city, when that is obviously not what Jethro meant. Philip: Obviously these two comments can be addressed together, so I will do so. Again, I refer to Jethr0ís remarks: ìThe city is people, including (much to your chagrin) The city is people, including (much to your chagrin) those who have spent their entire lives here and have earned the right to criticize a city administration that is more concerned about putting new benches on Farish Street and renaming the airport than curbing crime. (emphasis mine) I admit that Jethr0 likely didnít have in mind constitutional issues when he typed this. Nevertheless, the very fact that he used the phrase ì..and have earned the right..î just after the phrase about people spending their entire lives here CERTAINLY gives the impression that Jethr0 thinks that residency length determines how seriously oneís criticisms of any aspect of a place should be taken. Furthermore, implying that residency length is a litmus test for taking oneís criticisms seriously DOES imply that newcomers have no valuable ideas for contributing to the health of a locale (would that also include non-residents who make positively glowing remarks about Jackson METRO, too? And Mississippi in general for that matter?). That may or may not be a correct inference of Jethr0ís remarks, but I promise you that A LOT of people would take it that way. Besides, Iíd say scorn, ridicule, willful instant and arbitrary dismissal of remarks by the local populace is a pretty thick barrier to free expression, even if not government-imposed. It also tends to ruin the long-run quality of life because those with power or social prestige wonít always have all the facts they need to make proper decisions (which is the whole point of Freedom of Speech as far as Iím concerned). Put more simply, the government might not threaten a newcomerís freedom of speech; nether would the long-time residents in any legal sense; nevertheless invalidating someoneís opinion on non-substantive grounds certainly defeats the point of free speech. Therfore, this practice should be discouraged (not through governmental means, but through changing the cultural so as to make such attitudes socially unacceptable)

Philip

Jan 29 2005

Good lord, people. I thought it was the liberals and feminists who were not supposed to have a sense of humor. Sucking the fun out of everything, and all that, with their political correctness. Have none of you ever listened to a David Letterman Top 10 list? Or anything similar? It's supposed to be light hearted fluff, to fill a bit of space. Not a slap in the face. I hardly meet any of the criteria - I'd much rather have the Van Gogh, thank you very much (no diss on the local artists, but the resale value, after I'd enjoyed it for a decade or so...). It's pretty hilarious that Jetrho criticizes Donna and JFP for being self absorbed and then takes the whole piece as a PERSONAL ATTACK. Let's all step back, take a deep breath, and get over ourselves.

kate

Jan 29 2005

Jason and Jethr0, as with any criticism, persoal attacks do nothing. Actually, at some point, I believe, criticism with attacks becomes nothing more than a diatribe by definition. What Jethr0 posted turned from criticism of the piece to a personal written attack on Donna, the JFP, and its readers. Comments like the ones below took it from an honest criticism with some valid points to a diatribe against all involved with the JFP. [quote]-"fluff piece that is characteristic of the self-absorbed staff of the JFP" -"someone who left for greener pastures, only to return as a cultural carpetbagger set on enlightening us backward hicks"[/quote] After re-reading the post, I'd say it was an intentional attack designed to put the staff on the defensive over a "fluff piece." Jethr0, I couldn't agree more that those that have stayed in this city, worked in this city, and died in this city are true Jacksonians. I don't think you'll find anyone to disagree with you on that point. I also agree that those that eat at H&Ms, own DiFatta's art, and know and dine at the Mayflower are Jacksonians (if anything at heart since I know people that come from all over the country to relive those places). My main issue is Keifer's was never mentioned since that is the ONE place all natives seem to visit when they come back for visits. Of course, you're also a Jacksonian if you deal with those huge, tree roaches... Pigeons, owls AND bats... Potholes... High tag costs... The list is not definitive and as you stated is really nothing more than a "fluff piece." Every publication tends to have them. It's a way for the staff to blow off some steam, possibly fill space, and add some light-heartedness! I guess my point is this: If you really want to discuss those issues or bring them to light, you must use a tone that is receptive to that... Otherwise, it's all in vain because insults do nothing more than establish a hostile environment for a conversation. As for navel gazing, jason, you certainly nailed it... The piece is introspective for many and certainly spent too much time simply pondering the thoughts of the authors. Oh, wait... Doesn't that mean nearly ALL columnists that write about other things than "fair and balanced socially charged news" are navel gazing? By definition, any piece with a fair amount of time spent dealing with the author's own thoughts, perspective, feelings or problems is navel gazing. But, I guess since it has a negative purpose that could never apply to all the city's self-absorbed columnists whining about their age, raccoon stew, the King Edward, SUVs, dating, dating gay men, and so forth... Right? I mean, there's no real shortage of navel gazing going on in this city.

kaust

Jan 29 2005

Hell, some of the best and funniest pieces I've read in any publication have been nothing more than navel gazing. Frankly, I see all this back and forth as fruitless. Jethr0, you made some excellent points that added a very serious thought about what a true Jacksonian is... Your tone and attacks took away the serious points you were trying to make. I'm off to stair at my navel now... If it's pierced twice, does that mean I am pierced navel gazing or am I still simply navel gazing?

kaust

Jan 29 2005

Oh, jethr0, if you ever see that you've exceeded the max. characters for a post, try hitting +<- (that's the alt key and the backward arrow if using a PC). Often, this will take you to the previous page without refreshing the window. Buy my book "Knol's Tech Tips for Not Losing Comments" It'll be out in March 2098. Advanced copies in 2097.

kaust

Jan 29 2005

Jason: ìÖbut concentrating on the form [of Jethroís remarks], rather than the content, is a sure sign of hiding from the truth. Philip: On the other hand, bad form (especially the, to put it bluntly, pit bull tone Jethr0 took) does give us clues about his capacity to think calmly and rationally. His apparent, I hasten to add, lack is a warning sign saying ìExamine Claims With Care. Significantly Higher Than Average Probability of Errorî. It also gives the impression he has barred any possibility that he is mistaken about us. Fair or not, thatís my impression of him based on previous experiences. So contrary to your own claim, stressing the form of his remarks is far from ìa sure sign of hiding from the truthî, itís what I call ìall due prudenceî. Jason: Philip asks if they have been disrespectful to MBrady. As far as I know, no they haven't, because her arguments are more easily rebutted than Jethro's, and so there's no need to hide. Jason, that assumes two things. (1)Rebuttal ease actually does, determine our respectfulness. Maybe your experience is different; but mine tells me that simplistic and downright sloppy thinking (especially if accompanied by a hostile tone) is more likely to invite ridicule than a well-argued case, no matter how off base the assumptions of the latter case are. Who would you say is more likely to be rudely disrespected by a crowd, someone who says either (a) or (b) (a) [Random ëold-fashion ideaí] should be ditched for the simple reason that they have been believe for more than 30 years, and on the basis of that fact alone ñ end of story!î (b) [Random ëold-fashion ideaí] should be respectfully retired because, while it might have been proper and even necessary in its day, conditions have changed in such a way that this idea is more of an obstacle to societyís well-being than an enhancer of it. (2)MBradyís arguments are, in fact, more easy to rebut than Jethr0ís I admit this is just my opinion but Iíd that MBradyís claims hold more water than Jethroís. At least with the church-government issue we discussed, one can argue on one level AND with some historic precedent that because governments are duty-bound to protect the well-being of society they are also duty-bound to protect it from corrupting spiritual influences (although many on this board argued extensively against that position). With Jethr0, he is merely arguing that the "article" (if one can call it that) exposes the authorís belief ìif you arenít doing all this, you arenít a real Jacksonianî. This is so far off base I wonder how serious Jethr0 truly is about the complaint (a big part of me suspects [but canít prove, of course] heís just looking for an excuse to shoot down the JFP, no matter how trivial, because it consistently rubs him the wrong way). Kateís right. Itís just a light-hearted list. Just enjoy it as a window on another aspect of what a "real Jacksonian" is.

Philip

Jan 29 2005

Knol: "I guess my point is this: If you really want to discuss those issues or bring them to light, you must use a tone that is receptive to that... Otherwise, it's all in vain because insults do nothing more than establish a hostile environment for a conversation." I agree using a respectful, clear tone and form of presentation is good, but it is not the main thing. I encounter many comments that are shrill and disrespectul in some way, but if they offer something interesting in terms of content despite that, I am glad for it. Whereas much of the time respectful tones signify a lack of any content (esp. in the too polite South). While the presenter does carry some burden for creating a hostile atmosphere, as I said before, it is a mark of intelligence to be able to look past issues of form to the content. While it is useful to look at the form, the content is what is the most important thing. Everyone is now saying, "it's just a light hearted list." To which Jethro preemptively responded: "'But this is just a light piece meant to highlight unique aspects of the city!' Maybe, but it smacks of the arrogant, navel-gazing, smarmy attitude that permeates the entire publication." I'm not saying I fully support his claim, but the list does go along with the idea that it should be called the "Fondren Free Press". The navel gazing charge isn't because it's introspective Knol (and besides, I didn't think it was introspective, just fun), but that it betrays a certain idiocy (in the original Greek sense). My two main points: 1) Content is more important than form. 2) The content of Jethro's comment has at least some truth to it: the JFP often acts like the FFP. This piece, while light hearted, excludes the majority of Jackson but includes the majority of Fondren, and that content must mean something.

jason

Jan 29 2005

Jason, your Fondren Free Press jab is ridiculous in this case. There's nothing on the list that has anything to do with Fondren, except that Ellen Langford has a studio there! I know you hate the JFP because we're not communists ready to lead a revolution, as you've made clear in the past, Jason, but at least base your criticisms on some semblance of fact. Otherwise, y'all can have this discussion. It always befuddles me to see fluff attract so much energy. I wish everyone had been half of interested in the, er, navel-gazing story about children being tortured in training schools we did last issue. But each to his own. Carry on.

DonnaLadd

Jan 29 2005

Ok... I'll bite, jason. No hickies though... I can't wear turtlenecks all winter. 1.†You†eat†at†Hal†&†Malís†more†than†once†a†month.† Downtown 2.†You†own†at†least†one†shirt†made†by†Chane†or†Blockwear.† Fondren and Jacktown 3.†Crossroads†is†more†than†just†a†Britney†Spears†movie†to†you. People from all over the Metro and even rural Mississippi 4.†You†shop†at†Video†Library†or†Video†CafȆbefore†you†go†near†Blockbuster. NE Jackson and Belhaven 5.†You†look†forward†to†the†Convention†Center†more†than†your†birthday. Downtown 6.†The†Mayflower†is†not†just†something†Pilgrims†rode†on. Downtown 7.†You†think†Kamikaze†and†David†Banner†are†cooler†than†Lil†Jon†and†Usher.†West Jackson and Downtown 8.†When†you†think†downtown,†you†think†rental†property,†not†crime†cesspool. Not very Fondren-oriented 9.†Your†idea†of†fun†is†a†King†Elementary†concert. A band... Are they from Fondren 10.†Youíd†rather†have†a†Tony†DiFatta, Ellen†Langford or William Goodman†painting†than†a†Van†Gogh†in†your†living†room. Belhaven, Fondren & Fondren 11.†You†know†that†a†vegetarian†(Al†Stamps)†makes†the†best†and†beefiest†burger†in†town.† Northside 12.†You†know†that†ìSmith†Robertsonî†is†not†hyphenated†(itís†a†manís†name). Factoid not attached to Fondren This article, statistically, had little, if NOTHING, to do with Fondren. Instead it covered many pockets and 'hoods of the city and businesses/people that are helping the city evolve beyond cowboy hats, horses, and white flight. Not even a mention of Fondren corner in there. (gasp!) Not sure if you've read the recent issues but they cover neighborhoods from all over the city... The articles discuss pros and cons of those neighborhoods and have face-to-face interviews with residents from those 'hoods. They do so without mentioning Fondren too! Your point about Fondren is null from my own perspective but I respect your right to feel and think what you want... It is America after all and we love liberty and democracy like nerve gas, nukes, and dildo-less countrysides. I'm not here to defend the JFP. I'm defending myself since I was lumped in with all the JFP readers and the publication itself. You're using one helluva large brush to paint all of us into one corner while complaining that's what the JFP did. Pot, this is kettle, can you hear me clearly?

kaust

Jan 29 2005

You're right, Knol, Chane is in Fondren. Staxx (Blockwear) is Jackson State and West Jackson. Also, one location of Stamps is next to Jackson State.

DonnaLadd

Jan 29 2005

t is America after all and we love liberty and democracy like nerve gas, nukes, and dildo-less countrysides. That may be funniest thing I've read in months. ;-) Over and out.

DonnaLadd

Jan 29 2005

Well, I took your "navel-gazing training academy" statement the wrong way. It made me laugh hysterically until I realized it wasn't a sarcastic comment. ;-) I was thinking, "How do I sign up?" But, really, after reading the piece, it scared the hell out of me but I can't go posting "kudos" on every article I like. Well, I could but that would be trivial. Off for a tarot reading, book signing and coffee in Fondren. Doh! I mentioned it... I mentioned the F word. Fondren Corner! Doh! I did it again.

kaust

Jan 29 2005

Well, I took your "navel-gazing training academy" statement the wrong way. It made me laugh hysterically until I realized it wasn't a sarcastic comment. ;-) I was thinking, "How do I sign up?" Ok... one last post before heading to, umm, err, Fondren. I have no clue how I misread that comment about the training schools. After re-reading, I realize now more than ever I need to go to Cups in Fondren and drink a latte and read a little Marx while dabbling in the occult.

kaust

Jan 29 2005

I think "navel-gazing academy" is another phrase we should add to the listóor, as Todd likes to say, will go in the movie. And it's actually being used wrong above: navel-gazing typically means to constantly think and talk only about yourself, and what you're doing *wrong* -- such as the navel-gazing that went on at The New York Times after they did such a miserable job of debunking Bush's myths about WMD before the war started. Or their ombudsman column that talks about everything the publication does wrong. We try to admit and correct our errors immediately, but we don't waste a lot of time navel-gazing beyond that. Criticize us for that if you want, but there are bigger fish to fry in jackson. Also, Knol, when I finish working, I'm going shopping today in Fondren myself. I don't care who wants to symbolize it as the Root of all Capitalist Evil, I love this neighborhood and love having our offices here. People from all over the city walk through our offices every day and then go and WALK around a city neighborhood that is a mixture of residential and locally owned businesses, many of whom in turn support the paper. They've done a remarkable job with Fondren, and I'm not going to ignore it in our paper to try to satisfy a couple shrill complainers well-versed in one-eyed cherry-pickin'. To work now.

DonnaLadd

Jan 29 2005

Clarification: The FFP statement was meant to be a summary/symbolic statement of the 'idiocy' (again, greek) that characterizes much of what the JFP writes about, not a precise geographical claim. As for the things in the top ten list not all being in Fondren: 1. I would think it'd be clear that I wasn't pitting Fondren vs. NE Jackson but using 'Fondren' as a metonymy for the minority of Jackson the list above caters to. 2. Most of the things on the list do apply more to Fondrenites and related urbs than they do to the majority of Jackson! Ladd to me: "I know you hate the JFP because we're not communists ready to lead a revolution, as you've made clear in the past, Jason, but at least base your criticisms on some semblance of fact." That would be stupid of me to hate the JFP for that, as it'd be silly to expect otherwise. The point isn't that I 'hate' the JFP but I was responding to the unfair treatment of Jethro on this thread. Another snarky comment from Ladd: "It always befuddles me to see fluff attract so much energy. I wish everyone had been half of interested in the, er, navel-gazing story about children being tortured in training schools we did last issue." This hasn't attracted more of my energy than the training schools. Unfair treatment of someone on a thread is something that can be appropriately addressed by commenting on the thread--and that requires minimal energy--sort of like warm-ups before exercising, addressing an issue like that of the training schools is not so easily approached. (And I don't understand how the article was navel gazing?) Further, I do not think it'd be smart politically to work with you on the issue of the training schools as I haven't seen a program or leadership worth working with, though I could see us working together on issues such as homosexuality by hosting a debate on christianity and homosexuality as you could organize a large crowd for such an event.

jason

Jan 29 2005

A symbolic metonymy for urbs. All is clear now.

DonnaLadd

Jan 29 2005

Good heavens! This thread has grown in so many directions, I'm not sure where to start, but I'll give it the old college try, and, given my previous experience, I'm gonna break it down into several small posts, that's for doggone sure! Bear with me people, I'll do my best to get to each of you.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

Jay, I don't fault anyone for leaving for college or any other reason. This is America, and each of us may go where he or she pleases. I do, however, have an issue with people who leave for an extended period then return, only to start throwing out obscure "qualifications" for citizenship that would only apply to the small group of people with whom they associate. Add to that an insulting tone toward long term residents who do not have a pollyanna view of the city's problems, and you have someone who exacerbates my ire. I am doing something to make my city better. For one thing, I live in the city limits and have for most of my life. The idea that I should run for city council or be quiet is ludicrous. By that logic, I should run for city council, mayor, Congress and/or the Presidency before I dare criticize. Have you announced your candidacy? No? Well I believe you are still welcome to express your opinions here or anywhere, even if you aren't in politics. The "if you don't like it, leave!" sentiment is yet another I'll add to the list of "you should just stop reading/go away" comments laid out in this thread...a couple coming from members of the staff. As I said before, if you don't want to hear what I have to say, I'll leave and you can all go back to telling each other how much Bush sucks. I have no idea what Jackson Christian Family (or whatever it's called) has to do with this discussion, but I'm fairly certain they aren't calling certain citizens, "un-hip losers." I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

Philip, since you're cutting and pasting, I'll do the same in an attempt not to misconstrue your original thoughts. Philip: Iíve seen that attitude from the areaís natives as well: those with opposing points of view have to be weird, stupid, or evil. Therefore, my criticisms of die-hard traditionalists are just as valid (in your own mind) as yours are of the JFP I believe the "two wrongs make a right" fallacy is laid out in your much vaunted Nizkor project list. And speaking of that (yes, I did follow the link and I have seen them before), why you want to apply such stringent technical debating standards to a casual blog discussion is beyond me. However, if you do, you might wish to parse your own posts first. I am certain some of the things I have written do not pass such rigorous muster but neither do yours. And if we are going to take it to that level then we'll all start criticizing punctuation next. The "in your own mind" comment is characteristic of your wont to interpolate all kinds of things about my state of mind completely from your inference. More on that later. Philip: I agree with the other posters -- they ARE childish. One of the key markers of immaturity is the failure to take a respectful tone toward those who oppose you...(etc.) Like the Mr. Bodine comment? At least you were big enough to retract that one. I guess everyone's a bit childish at times, hmm? Philip: What gives a person THE RIGHT to criticize is NOT the length of residency...it's the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION!!!! Furthermore, what gives a Jacksonian a duty to criticize such and such is CITIZENSHIP (meaning, legally registered to vote in Jackson). To be perfectly blunt, that mindset is more appropriate for a dictatorship than for a democracy. I hope you realize this makes you look like some hostile anti-outsider type; which in turn makes you look extremely provincial. Another example of you claiming to know my mindset based on one misinterpreted comment. When I say, "have earned the right to complain," I am not talking about a manifestation of the first amendment. I am talking about credibility. All have the right to criticize and I never said nor implied otherwise. That was entirely your doing. The offshoot into dictatorial mindset etc. is so far off the mark it defies logic. How you found your way there is befuddling, but it shows a penchant for assuming a lot more about me than you know. I guess some people will see only what they want to.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

(continuation of previous post) Philip: And Iím offended by your suggestion that those who havenít lived in Jackson (let alone Mississippi) ought not have the right to speak their mind about what they think of the city ñ both good and bad (recall my Constitution remarks) . [lengthy bit about non-natives follows] I never made this suggestion and you look utterly silly saying I did. In fact, I never attempted to put a limit on ANYONE'S rights to speak about Jackson, long-termer, short-termer, resident or non. You created that out of thin air. I don't disagree at all about people who come from other places. My problem is with someone who has lived here a short time making rules for what constitutes a "Jacksonian", especially when that list is highly exclusive of most of those who have made this city what it is. Philip: Read the Clinton LeSeuer and other threads and tell us where weíve been disrespectful of MBrady (a discussion ìopponentî). Then get back with me later. Otherwise, I will automatically assume that you are easily offended anyone who expresses differing points of view ñ even if polite about it. As far as reading through another lengthy thread for evidence of acceptance of dissenters, I would place the burden of proof upon you. If you cannot tolerate dissent in this thread without suggesting the dissenter leave or leveling accusations with no basis in fact at him, then I see no need to peruse other threads for evidence of your benevolence. As far as automatically assuming something about me, that seems to be your modus operandi. I don't see that reading another thread and commenting on it will make a difference.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

Philip: Somehow, though, I get the feeling that Jethr0 wouldn't count those places -- too anti-traditional for his taste (I presume). Jethr0: Are we seeing a pattern here? I would respectfully request that you not assume so much when all you know of me is a handful of posts I have made to this thread.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

Ladd: However, your postings here, so far, are so filled with vitriol directed at me and the staff that it's hard to take you seriously. Clearly, I hit a nerve with you, and I apologize. But, lighten up a bit and just have a conversation. Otherwise, I'm gonna keep ribbin' you, Dude. If you'd care to take a breath, and discuss specific issues, then you're welcome to do that. You'd probably be surprised to find that folks around take to that pretty well. ;-) You can keep ribbing me all you want, dude. It's not particularly effective and succeeds in avoiding the question, that being why this list defines Jacksonian and why long-term residency, making a life here, etc. do not make the cut. I don't expect an answer. As I said earlier, this is just a fluff piece, but it is characteristic of the attitude of the JFP, which tends (in my view) to shine a glowing light on the artist/video store clerk who lives in a Fondren rental house and listens to certain "approved" music and patronizes certain "approved" establishments. Those who live on McDowell road, eat at McDonald's, shop at Wal-Mart and listen to hit radio need not apply. Ladd: ...Ladd-the-optimistic-Cultural-Carpetbagger. There's optimism and there's pie-eyed optimism, and the idea that a hip art/music scene will erase the crime problem in Jackson is a whole other level of naivete. I could talk to the, "we want people to move back downtown, but not the rich people," attitude, but that's off topic and a completely different issue.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

Philip: I admit that Jethr0 likely didnít have in mind constitutional issues when he typed this. Nevertheless, the very fact that he used the phrase ì..and have earned the right..î just after the phrase about people spending their entire lives here CERTAINLY gives the impression that Jethr0 thinks that residency length determines how seriously oneís criticisms of any aspect of a place should be taken. Furthermore, implying that residency length is a litmus test for taking oneís criticisms seriously DOES imply that newcomers have no valuable ideas for contributing to the health of a locale (would that also include non-residents who make positively glowing remarks about Jackson METRO, too? And Mississippi in general for that matter?). That may or may not be a correct inference of Jethr0ís remarks, but I promise you that A LOT of people would take it that way. Jethr0: Here we go again. Iíve already addressed this, but I will underscore it here. Ladd considers people who criticize the city without doing something about it (more specifically, doing something of which she approves about it) as ìun-hip losersî or ìnot-very interesting peopleî (paraphrase). I say that by virtue of their living here long-term, they HAVE been doing something about it. Paying taxes, for example. Voting, for another. Continuing to live and work hereÖneed I go on? In my estimation, they have ìearned the rightî to make their comments, and certainly without being called names for it. (what was that about me being childish?) I am attempting to be very specific here, Philip, because you take any ambiguity and stretch it to the limits of credulity (and beyond). You presume far more than you should. I would suggest that you speak only for yourself, rather than me or A LOT of people. I doubt seriously many would assume this single comment means I think newcomers have no valuable comment. But for the record, and to keep you from re-accusing me of it, I do not think newcomers have nothing valuable to add.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

(continuation of previous post) Philip: Besides, Iíd say scorn, ridicule, willful instant and arbitrary dismissal of remarks by the local populace is a pretty thick barrier to free expression, even if not government-imposed. It also tends to ruin the long-run quality of life because those with power or social prestige wonít always have all the facts they need to make proper decisions (which is the whole point of Freedom of Speech as far as Iím concerned). Put more simply, the government might not threaten a newcomerís freedom of speech; nether would the long-time residents in any legal sense; nevertheless invalidating someoneís opinion on non-substantive grounds certainly defeats the point of free speech. Therfore, this practice should be discouraged (not through governmental means, but through changing the cultural so as to make such attitudes socially unacceptable) Jethr0: Again we ride a tangent far afield of any original intent. There is not a single bloody part of my comments here that attempts to clip the wings of free speech. Please quantify your accusations. I would say calling people ìun-hip losersî or referring to me as ìMr. Bodineî are tangible examples of scorn and ridicule, apologies notwithstanding. You will not find an instant and arbitrary dismissal of newcomers remarks, not even of this list, in my posts. What I said was (if youíd bother to read it) that why does THIS list constitute a Jacksonian and long-term residency not count? Iím certain that there are Jacksonians who do all these things, but I donít do a single one of them and if weíre going to start choosing who can wear the label of ìJacksonianî, then Iíll start with those who have lived here for a long time over those who eat at Hal & Malís regularly.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

Good lord, people. I thought it was the liberals and feminists who were not supposed to have a sense of humor. Sucking the fun out of everything, and all that, with their political correctness. Have none of you ever listened to a David Letterman Top 10 list? It's pretty hilarious that Jetrho criticizes Donna and JFP for being self absorbed and then takes the whole piece as a PERSONAL ATTACK. Yes, I do take it personally. Not so much on me but on the city in which I grew up and continue to live, work, and raise my family. Nobody I know would match up to more than two of these items, and to suggest that this is what makes one a Jacksonian is offensive to me, especially when the one making this determination is a relative newcomer. (and before you start with your fears of Constitutional repression, Philip, I don't think newcomers have nothing valuable to say or that they can't criticize, but I do NOT think they are qualified to start telling those of us who have been here for decades what makes one a "Jacksonian".) I've lived here for a long time, certainly before people started calling Woodland Hills Fondren, and I think that qualifies for Jacksonian status, moreso than the things in this list. If that makes me self-absorbed, so be it, but I did not craft a list of characteristics that would apply to me and 12 other people and then try to pass it off as "You're A Jacksonian If..."

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

Jason and Jethr0, as with any criticism, persoal attacks do nothing. Actually, at some point, I believe, criticism with attacks becomes nothing more than a diatribe by definition. What Jethr0 posted turned from criticism of the piece to a personal written attack on Donna, the JFP, and its readers. Fair enough, Knol. Thank you for keeping your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on me. My comments were specifically directed at the attitude of the publication, not at Ms. Ladd personally. Had I called her stupid or ugly or an un-hip loser, that would have been personal. What I did reference was an attitude that I have gleaned from the JFP that is unfriendly to those who aren't part of a certain small stratum of citizens who do certain things, like vote "progressively." (reference Donna's recent editorial where she gets giddy over a record young, no progressive young vote). This piece is eminently characteristic of that attitude, in my opinion. I did call her and the staff self-absorbed, but that is entirely in reference to their writings in the paper, which are fair game. I have no idea what the woman is like IRL. (and for the record, since I have to be very specific, I don't think she is stupid or ugly or an un-hip loser) The only thing that may have been personal was the bit about running off to New York to write for the Village Voice. A bit snide, to be sure, but this piece got under my skin (and still does). So I apologize for that one, but I still think someone who left and just recently came back is pretty damned presumptious to tell me what makes one a Jacksonian, especially when long term residency is conspicuously absent. I would say calling a convenience store a Tote-Sum is a unique Jacksonian quality, moreso than anything here, but most of the JFP readership would probably not get that reference. I would apologize for the cultural carpetbagger comment, but she seemed to like that one. Oh, and thanks for the "saving my comments" tip. I've got that one written down, but I'm breaking them up just to be safe.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

Philip: With Jethr0, he is merely arguing that the "article" (if one can call it that) exposes the authorís belief ìif you arenít doing all this, you arenít a real Jacksonianî. This is so far off base I wonder how serious Jethr0 truly is about the complaint (a big part of me suspects [but canít prove, of course] heís just looking for an excuse to shoot down the JFP, no matter how trivial, because it consistently rubs him the wrong way). Jethr0: Again Philip makes grand assumptions about me. You have a great deal of nerve to purport to hold me to strenuous debating standards and then level such accusations based solely upon your utter whimsy. You have read a handful of posts I have made here. That is all you know about me and my opinions, sir. I have made no such assumptions about you. "Gee, Jethr0 disagrees with this piece, so he hates the Constitution, discounts Belhaven and Millsaps, and wants to silence all newcomers and ship them to Slobovia! (I can't prove this, mind you, but I highly suspect as much!)" There's a word for such assumptive behavior. It's called bigotry. Philip, you are not worth my time. I would suggest sticking to that which is written rather than concocting paranoid conspiracies out of the ether. Maybe you'll do better next time.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

1. I would think it'd be clear that I wasn't pitting Fondren vs. NE Jackson but using 'Fondren' as a metonymy for the minority of Jackson the list above caters to. Agreed, Jason, and I understand exactly what you mean. Do not feel you have to apologize for another's lacking vocabulary. Fondren, in your statement, is not meant to define geographic boundaries, but to describe a certain type of person. Taking issue with that is like taking issue with calling the government "Washington" because many officials do not live or work within the boundaries of the city.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

Jethr0, I haven't taken your comments seriously since you entered the site above with an angry ad hominem attack encompassing sweeping generalizations about me and the JFP staff. You showed your butt right off the bat, as my mama would have said, and thus established how people would react to you. Then, inevitably, you're complaining about being poorly treated. Since then, this thread has been a tiresome exerciseónot because you raise valid points; maybe there are some in there somewhere, but I can't find them among your vitriol toward me and the JFP staff, nor am I looking very closely. I have no desire to defend the very core of my being, or the motivation for the JFP, or the motives of our staffers to you or anyone else. They are what we say they are, and have been since the very first issue. There are so secrets. Frankly, I hear from so few people who see the JFP as you (or Jason) do, and then you only frame your concerns in personal attacks and sweeping generalizations (the FFP, per Jason), so it's hard to take you seriously (although, you can bet that the phrase "cultural carpetbagger" is now in my vocabulary and will appear in the paper in some form, so I thank you for that). However, we hear from hundreds of people a week from throughout the city who believe that the JFP is a positive force for ALL of Jackson; you and Jason simply don't cancel that out (you two should get together; I suspect that your disdain for the JFP may be all you agree on, but I could be wrong. It's also fun to be hit from both sides at once. Kind of proves a point that I like proved from time to time to people who try to frame us as one extreme or the other.) As you say, I can only draw my conclusions from the foot you've put forward so far, and by your own admission, it's not your best one, or the complete one, so I may have the wrong idea about youóbased at least in part on on your implication that I should have lived in Jackson all my life, had children here and gone to church here in order to gave the right to criticize it. That's bullshitó"outsider agitator" rhetoric left over from the 1960s, and this cultural carpetbagger from Neshoba County finds it plain ridiculous.

DonnaLadd

Jan 30 2005

If you'd care, Jethro, from this point, to come on here and have a serious discussion without ad hominem attacks of any individual, newspaper staff or other blogger, then you are welcome to do so. However, please refrain from filling screen after screen with such a treatise as you just did; that's considered bad netiquette, and you just lose people. I've allowed this particular one to continue on this thread this far without deleting personal attacks because you weren't disrupting a thread on a serious topic. However, Todd plans to move such personal arguments to a particular forum in the future where y'all can jump up and down on the JFP all you mean. Because, you know you're right: we suck. And, I should add to the others: It's pissing contests like this that drive traffic down on the site. So it really is best not to feed the trollóalthough I'm certainly guilty of it as well. I discourage the rest of you to refrain from responding to the personal attacks, even on our behalf, although I do appreciate it. OK, I'm done with this one. If it continues in its current tone, we'll meet it to a Forum.

DonnaLadd

Jan 30 2005

One other clarification, being that Jethro keeps misrepresenting what I wrote in my column this week. "Un-hip losers" apply to people who just bash the city all the time as sport, without any basis in realityófolks who try to say that we can't have a downtown Renaissance until every stankin' crime is gone, people who call Jackson a "cesspool" and say you can't be here after dark (talk radio, you know who you are). It does not apply to fair criticism of the city. Either, as someone said above, Jethro has not been reading the JFP very long, or perhaps he is only "reading to refute," but we are all about criticism focused on helping the city: from open records to a full analysis of crime stats (which the media here never do, positive or negative), to a full story about the pros and con of the Convention Center, and so on. This is very clear if one actually reads the JFP. Finally, while on the topic of cultural carpetbaggers (yes, I've taken the CC phrase back), CC Alan Mann of the Mississippi Opera (he's a, gasp, Canadian) pulled off an amazing feat last night with "The Gospel at Colonus." I teared up just to see all the breathtaking, local talent he pulled together on that stage to interpret Sophocles in a way that Mississippians can truly appreciate. I think we should declare Alan the "Cultural Carpetbagger o' the Week" for bringing Jacksonians such a special treat.

DonnaLadd

Jan 30 2005

GAWD! Good thing I saw Donna's positive comments about the Canadian "expats" to Magnolia-land (affectionate, not snide, description!). Otherwise, I'd've been hit by that drive-by spamming!!!! Let's hope this is the last of it, JEEEEZE!!! Speaking of the "Far North", I think I recall a post from last year from a Canadian living in Jackson. So that makes two of them that I know of. Plus, there's Jaro from the Czech Republic (is he still around?) Then I recall reading of a Venezuelan immigrant to Jackson (forgot what she was doing though, sorry). Who else from outside the US do you know of that is in the area?

Philip

Jan 30 2005

Lots of people, Philip. But I don't think we should limit our examination of "cultural carpetbagger" to non-Americans. After all, Jethr0 is defining it as anyone who was not born in Jackson and/or has never left the city to attend school or work elsewhere. (Remember, one is still a carpetbagger if one spent their upbringing and college years in the state ... and then dared to leave. Thus, moi.) Therefore, as I read it, a bona fide C.C. would be: 1. Someone was not born in one of the multitude of hospitals within the city limits. 2. Someone who was born here, but left the city (not just the state, it seems) to attend college. Therefore, an Ole Miss grad would qualify. 3. Someone who was born here, but left to work elsewhere. (That could be Haley Barbour, butt he's already failed No. 1, I believe. He wasn't born in a Jackson hospital, was he? Correct me if I'm wrong.) 4. Someone not born in Jackson, the state of Mississippi, or certainly the U.S., who lives here now or who lives elsewhere and has an interest in seeing the city (not the state, remember) do better (that would be you, Philip). Am I hitting all the criteria? Now, let's do our list. I may sound sarcastic, but I'm rather serious. Who do we know who has had a major influence on the city in some way who meet these criteria? (I feel a feature story coming here.) I'll go first: The late Thalia Mara. Willie Morris. Eudora Welty. William Winter. Ben Allen. Next?

DonnaLadd

Jan 30 2005

We should probably add that a C.C. would, I believe, be someone who is trying to help the city in some way (as they define, whether you agree with it or not)óculturally, politically, socially, etc. And I thought of a few more that seem solidly qualified as C.C.s: Ronnie Agnew, Clinton B. LeSueur, Deuce McAllister, Wyatt Emmerich and Wilson Carroll (buddies when they were at HARVARD.)

DonnaLadd

Jan 30 2005

Jethr0, what's your list look like? Top 10 signs your a Jacksonian? off the cuff, mine would be: 1. It's *Riverside* Park, not LeFleurs Bluff State Park. 2. It's Lakeland drive, not "highway 25" or whatever it's name is now. 3. It's the Sunflower, not McDade's. 4. It's the Jitney 14, not Winn Dixie. 5. You know what Fannie Mae's was, and when it closed. 6. You keep waiting for all those "new" businesses out Lakeland to flood, since you remember when all that was under water in 1979. 7. You really kind of miss the old circus tent, yellow/orange color scheme on the coliseum. 8. Every time you drive down Meadowbrook between the freeway and Ridgewood, you expect to see the Primos' 3 old horses out there, instead of that huge gated development. For the record, I think I only met 1 of the criteria. yet, I still feel like a Jacksonian, and I don't feel slighted by the JFP.

kate

Jan 30 2005

One last thing, and the I must be done with this thread. The whole point of the article could be viewed as shining a spotlight on those few people who do meet those criteria. For most people, Jackson is a host of stereotypes - some positive, some not so positive. Did it ever occur to anyone that the "list" may have been a way to show that we are NOT all the same? That you can be a Jacksonian, and not put "go to church" on your top 10 list? Not put "shop at WalMart"? etc. that the whole point is about giving voices to minority opinions, who may not have had that before? That the buddhist lesbian is as much a Jacksonian as the white baptist lawyer? Ponder, ponder. And, Jethr0, you did say that this article "got under your skin." Do you know why? It seems like such an odd choice of JFP articles to get worked up over. I mean, they've written other stuff that's far more annoying.

kate

Jan 30 2005

...based at least in part on on your implication that I should have lived in Jackson all my life, had children here and gone to church here in order to gave (sic) the right to criticize it. I find I must repeat myself, because you obviously have not read what I have written. Where did I say you do not have a right to criticize this city? Please feel free to cut and paste. I would appreciate your using my words rather than an extrapolation of your own prejudices as to what I "reallly meant." ...without ad hominem attacks of any individual, newspaper staff or other blogger... I guess "un-hip losers" does not qualify. Please explain a scenario where anything I have written here falls under the definition of ad hominem and "un-hip losers" does not. I'll go first: The late Thalia Mara. Willie Morris. Eudora Welty. William Winter. Ben Allen. As far as I know, not a single one of these people has attempted to define the qualifications for the title "Jacksonian". from open records to a full analysis of crime stats (which the media here never do, positive or negative) I believe the Clarion Ledger did a front page story today about the 2004 murder rate with extensive numbers. They do sell the Clarion Ledger in Fondren, don't they? However, please refrain from filling screen after screen with such a treatise as you just did; that's considered bad netiquette, and you just lose people. So I should not respond? I should allow people like Philip to make ridiculous assumptions about my character and not correct him because of "netiquette?" It seems that, once again, the response to someone who criticizes is, "just leave!" And you all have the audacity to accuse ME of wanting to limit someone's right to criticize...

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

OK, I'm done with this one. If it continues in its current tone, we'll meet it to a Forum. That's about the third time you've said that, yet you continue to return. Feel free to lock it or move it or otherwise stifle the discussion. Regardless, your message has been heard loud and clear. With all your sanctimony, you are the one calling names, you are the one who is attempting to silence me, and your allies are the ones making prejudicial assumptions about my mindset. It's always so ironic to me how the "progressives" who give lip service to free speech are always the first ones who want to curtail it when it doesn't go the way they want. You may want to think about renaming your paper. Given the multitude of requests for me to be quiet, I will leave now. You may all return to the coffee houses of Fondren where the art gallery denizens and alternative musicians meet and spend time equating the current administration to Hitler. Where you can continue to exclude the majority of this city from your hip little klatsch because we don't have a painting by one of your staff artists hanging on the wall. And don't kid yourself into thinking that you've maintained a genial tone here. I'm sure the craven will readily post here with their sharpened knives now that there is no chance of rebuttal, and those posts won't merit a move to an out of the way place. Sorry I disrupted your little reality-insulated bubble.

Jethr0

Jan 30 2005

Jethro, dude, still wondering what your list would look like, and why this particular article gets under your skin? It's a mystery to me. What's a Jacksonian for you? And, I must say, most people live in little bubbles, whether consciously or not. My reality bubble looks one way, yours another. Got in a good discussion yesterday at sunday school, about the difference between *tolerance* of diversity, and *celebration* of diversity. Like I said yesterday, you can view the LIST as an attempt to pigeonhole what a Jacksonian looks like, or as a reminder that there's a whole diverse crew of Jacksonians out there, and the LIST is just a reminder of it. Or, the LIST may be inherently evil in some way, that I don't understand. Perhaps the power of the JFP is so strong that, now that they've defined what a Jacksonian is, we'll all be forced to conform, based on the EVIL and nefarious magical powers that they are using to force us all into their mindset. Could go either way. I've not yet made up my mind.

kate

Jan 31 2005

You havent't disrupted anything, Jethr0, except for potentially good discussion. I haven't said I've been "genial" to you throughout here -- trolls ALWAYS bring out the worst in other bloggers. Everyone gets defensive. Stupid zingers start to fly. That's why trolling (postings filled with personal attacks meant to incite people) is against our user agreement. You seem to think you've simply tried to have a civil discussion, but your actual comments tell another whole story that anyone can read, starting with your first posting way, way above. And, no, you haven't "burst" anything -- your comments are entirely predictable. Every couple months someone such as yourself pops up, throws a bunch of ad hominems around, gets defensive when other people respond, generalize about the JFP because we're either too liberal for you or not lefty enough (Jason, for instance). I'm an alternative newspaper editor. I expect the angry extremes to pop up, and like it because everything you've posted is very enlightening, so that's cool. I have extremely thick skin, which also means that I'm willing to challenge postings on my site that contain incorrect facts and ad hominem attacks -- in large part to point out to people not used to civil debate what an "ad hominem" attack is. It's amazing how many people think that passes for debate these days. However, when these ad hominem-filled threads get out of control and go on incessantly as this one has, they start to squelch discussion and people start to leave the site because they just sound like a lot of pissin' and moanin' and responding to it. Truth is, I love the list you posted, and had you started out that way (as I had invited folks to do WAY above) instead of making all sorts of (incorrect) stereotypes about people, motives and stereotypes, you would look better right now, and folks would probably be enjoying talking to you. As it is, you just come across as a troll with a vendetta. CORRECTION: Kate posted that list, not Jethr0. It's still a cool list, though. Can I add: "As a toddler, you went with your daddy to every bootlegging joint in Jackson." ;-) Meantime, I'll say it once and not anymore because you're right that I shouldn't continue to throw meat to you. I stand behind the statement that folks who call the city a "cesspool" and other misinformed labels just to talk it down are "un-hip losers." I can't imagine why that gets under your skin so. It wasn't a personal attack on any individual. It's an attack on unfair attacks that hurts us all. OK, I will close this thread now. If you'd care to start a Forum thread to talk more about life in Jackson or such, feel free to do that, while refraining from ad hominem attacks, of course. You could probably get off to a new start over there if you'd like to try.

DonnaLadd

Jan 31 2005