> I thought it was style people were objecting to, the baroque
> dramatizing. Forgive me if that's not true of you and you were
> objecting to the content.
Both, really -- though I wouldn't have characterized the style as "Baroque dramatizing"; I like the Baroque and the dramatic and the intersection of the two. I would call West's style merely clownish, and not in a good way.
If the matter had been interesting one would have been less bothered by the grating manner. But it wasn't; a muddled hash of truisms and catchphrases.
Carrol (I believe) mentioned hearing a presentation by Glen Ford. That's the right point of comparison. Ford has a somewhat idiosyncratic appearance and manner, but what he has to say is so arresting, even if one doesn't agree with all of it, that one still listens to him with pleasure.
Whereas of course there was nothing in West's speech that anybody on this list could disagree with; but it was torture to sit through it, even on Youtube -- for some of us, anyway. But de gustibus, etc.
-- --
Michael J. Smith mjs at smithbowen.net
http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org http://www.cars-suck.org http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com