I take your point about biographies. Where I was wrong, I apologize. Tell me, what does laying a wreath to the statue of her country, or even being seen with the Duvaliers (or with Princess Diana) do to invalidate her real life's work? And how many people have done much worse, without losing prestige? G.B.Shaw's Stalinism is notorious; Carl Orff was a Nazi within the meaning of the act; does that mean that we should not perform the Plays Pleasant and Unpleasant, or listen to the Carmina Burana? (This is a review of a more or less outright Nazi in my own field of research: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0405105584/ref=dp_nav_0/002-0828778-5768013?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=283155&s=books)
But there is a difference: proximity to those nasty individuals was structural in their case, occasional in hers. And that while in her case it was without doubt the Hodjas and Duvaliers and Dianas who sought some respectability in her light, in the case of Orff, Shaw and many people like them, the opposite definitely was the case.
And you still have not answered my point: What in the name of Heaven and of all the Saints in paradise has any of this to do with the subject of my post? Can we not be talking about the great historical figure who lies dying as we write?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: To the person who left an irrelevant and poorly argued anonymous comment
Date: 2005-04-02 07:57 pm (UTC)But there is a difference: proximity to those nasty individuals was structural in their case, occasional in hers. And that while in her case it was without doubt the Hodjas and Duvaliers and Dianas who sought some respectability in her light, in the case of Orff, Shaw and many people like them, the opposite definitely was the case.
And you still have not answered my point: What in the name of Heaven and of all the Saints in paradise has any of this to do with the subject of my post? Can we not be talking about the great historical figure who lies dying as we write?