She shot an arrow in the air…

Gather ’round, ye lovers of the ludicrous, ye delectators of demonologie! I have for you a tale as twisted as a fakir’s rope, as misconceived as Leda’s progeny, as labyrinthine as the guts of a gorgon!

Do not lightly look upon this miasma of misappropriation! It hath rendered dark the brightest of minds, and driven the most sanguine logicians to babbling madness!

Behold! The third nomination for the famed Award d’Agincourt, for the longest bow in journalism:

We need tough love, not bad parenting

The fair lady Elizabeth de Farrelly hath, from the insubstantial air, summoned a swarming hornets’ cloud of distract’d notions to sting and prick away all the noble faculties that give sense to reason.

The lady doth detest too much. From Peter Garrett to Wollongong council. From primary school citizenship to fuel prices. From eating too much fat to Aristotle. No segue is too tangential. No bird in the hand goes unturned. No picnic proceeds – thus! – with all its constituent sandwiches.

I know not where her arrow fell to earth. Look fast, but don’t look long, lest it pierce thy pate and dash out thy brains!

Share this...
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • e-mail

8 Responses to “She shot an arrow in the air…”


  1. 1 pabloNo Gravatar

    I would love to think some party head-hunter is stalking EF this moment for a career move using the Maxine massager to show where she might headstart wih a junior ministry. For all I know it could be one of those ‘calls and emails’ she says she often receives from those frustrated with Canberra’s failures…fuel watch in the face of peak oil…grocery prices and global warming. Take the plunge Liz, you know you could do better.

  2. 2 TerryNo Gravatar

    Elizabeth Farrelly says:

    And maybe that’s just human nature. But human behaviour can change, and be changed by tax. So we must reject the bad parenting our leaders pathetically offer, demanding instead the tough love we need. Demand, for our own sake, the increased fuel prices that can make change smooth, not catastrophic. That’s moral courage. That’s citizenship.

    I thought that citizenship was about the right to vote for your elected representatives, and to have a say about how taxes are collected and used by public officials. No taxation without representation and all that …

    … or have I missed something?

    [I certainly couldn't see the connection between fuel taxes and Bill Henson's photographs].

  3. 3 adrianNo Gravatar

    Good point, above by Ms Farrelly I would have thought, although I haven’t read the entire article.

  4. 4 dk.auNo Gravatar

    “…unless you’re snowed in with them for the weekend”??
    “…phooey. Enough with the handkerchiefs already”??

    I condemn these Americanisms.

  5. 5 HelenNo Gravatar

    Mercurius, I’m a bit bemused that you link to one of her articles on consumption and environmental strategy, which are quite sensible, instead of one of hers on gender, which are completely daft. If it’s the long bow you’re wanting, try this for size!

    Remember Gabriel Garcia Marquez’ patriarch in One Hundred Years of Solitude, who lived for 20 years tied under the chestnut tree because they wouldn’t let him in the house? It’s as though we’ve decided that, reproduction aside, maleness is no longer useful or nice to be near, so we’ve ejected it from the house, pinning a sign to the door telling would-be entrants to contact their inner female.

    Sample size: 1. and he’s fictitious!

    Green consciousness, meanwhile, has sucked the heroism from the cowboy ethos, which depends on an oppositional, rather than nurturing, view of nature. Pluralism and multiculturalism have legitimised weakness and difference, undermining the old brawn-based hierarchy.

    So, Farrelly wants us to change our lifestyles and our relationship to the environment radically… but not by pussyfooting around with all these limp-wristed greenies, apparently. As long as it’s done in a stern, parental, preferably fatherly style (cf the article you quoted, Mercurius!)

    scientists generally agree that sperm count and sperm fitness are in decline, and have been for perhaps a century.

    Whether this trend is strictly Western is not clear. But either way, in view of developing countries’ eagerness to emulate the West, it’s a worry.

    Suggested causes are many, but mostly environmental: mobile phones, smoking, alcohol, caffeine, pesticides, ozone, environmental estrogen, even HIV. But one interesting branch of research suggests that low sperm count can be caused by exposure to toxins by a man’s mother, grandmother or great-grandmother during pregnancy and the disorder can be passed to successive generations without damage to the DNA.

    In classical Darwinian theory, such heritable infertility should be quickly selected out. Then again, the inheritance of acquired traits without genetic mutation is so counter-Darwinian that perhaps natural selection itself is now either flawed or patchy, due to the combined counter-evolutionary effects of modern medicine, reproductive science and the welfare state. …

    …Well, no. Think it through. Camille Paglia’s famous line that “if civilisation had been left in female hands we would still be living in grass huts” is part of it. But that’s not all. There are also the social dangers of a race of compliant, feminised men, a future characterised at best by stagnation and decadence, at worst by invasion and tyranny. …

    etc. I think I have a winner.

  6. 6 MercuriusNo Gravatar

    Thanks Helen. Everybody is welcome to enter their nominations for the longest bow!

    The Agincourt winner will be announced October 25th – upon St Crispin’s day, of course.

  7. 7 Paul BurnsNo Gravatar

    Societies are changed by tax? Yeah, think the American Revolution.

  8. 8 paul walterNo Gravatar

    Well, I’d reckon she’s light-years in front of the alternative tendency (Dahvine, Albrechtsen, Pryor, the late Bone etc. etc). Her line seems not dissimilar to Ackland, Adele Horin, or a few the other survivors from the Age of Broadsheet still at SMH, eg she derives from a better than tabloid culture. Her articles seem well constructed and there are comparatively original thought lines involved. Nah, she mightn’t be Christ on the Mount, but compared to some of the others she stands out like a diamond in a cowpat. Especially after some of the real dross written earlier during the Henson purges which she later commented on a couple of times on, for example,
    I’d follow Helen’s explanation almost word for word and her stuff fits way too well to be all phony.
    But I take on board the warning about why she’ d be employed at Fairfax, her place in the commentariat cosmogony and the futility of ever expecting too much from mass media or press culture.

Leave a Reply

Please read the comments policy. If you would like an icon beside your comment, please register a Gravatar.

There is a Comments Preview function below the typing box which activates when you start typing.

Allowed tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Examples:

<strong>Strong</strong>= Strong
<em>Emphasized</em> = Emphasized
<a href="http://www.url.com">Linked text</a>= Linked text
<blockquote>Quoted Text</blockquote>