SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
2. Select Email/Password Information.
3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.
Subscribers can find additional help here. Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
It’s interesting how some teams lose a game at the World Cup and instead of complaining loudly about controversial officiating calls, take responsibility for the loss. For example, here are a few remarks made by members of the Italian team, a four-time World Cup champion, after it lost 3-2 to Slovakia yesterday and was eliminated from the Cup:
“I take full responsibility,” [Coach] Lippi said after the 3-2 loss to Slovakia. “I thought this team could do more and that’s what I prepared it to do, but when you see a team that plays with fear in their legs and in their hearts you understand that you have failed.”
“It’s everyone’s fault, not just Lippi’s. We’ve all got to be accountable,” defender Gianluca Zambrotta said. “When you finish last in a group with New Zealand, Paraguay and Slovakia, with all respect to those teams, it’s only right to go home.”
“When we get back to Italy we’re going to put helmets on,” Gattuso added. “And we’re going to accept all the criticism.”
Mind you, as the New York Times reported, “There was some bad luck, too, especially on Thursday. A shot by Quagliarella was stopped in the 67th minute, perhaps past the goal line, by the right knee of Slovak defender Martin Skrtel. Quagliarella put the ball into the net in the 85th minute but was ruled offside.”
Compare that to the reaction of players from the United States, which had a goal called back against Slovenia in its second game and ended up in a draw. Afterward players complained that the game was stolen by the refs. The referee who made the bad call — after an earlier bad call favoring the U.S. that set up the annulled goal — was caricatured as a corrupt villain. The national media was so outraged that it all but suggested that a grand conspiracy had been hatched by the referees to deny the U.S. of victory.
And people say Italians are hot-headed and egotistical.
More from Ken Silverstein:
Perspective — October 23, 2013, 8:00 am
How pro-oil Louisiana politicians have shaped American environmental policy
Postcard — October 16, 2013, 8:00 am
A trip to one of the properties at issue in Louisiana’s oil-pollution lawsuits
I recently spent a semester teaching writing at an elite liberal-arts college. At strategic points around the campus, in shades of yellow and green, banners displayed the following pair of texts. The first was attributed to the college’s founder, which dates it to the 1920s. The second was extracted from the latest version of the institution’s mission statement:
The paramount obligation of a college is to develop in its students the ability to think clearly and independently, and the ability to live confidently, courageously, and hopefully.
Let us take a moment to compare these texts. The first thing to observe about the older one is that it is a sentence. It expresses an idea by placing concepts in relation to one another within the kind of structure that we call a syntax. It is, moreover, highly wrought: a parallel structure underscored by repetition, five adverbs balanced two against three.
Percentage of Britons who cannot name the city that provides the setting for the musical Chicago:
An Australian entrepreneur was selling oysters raised in tanks laced with Viagra.
A naked man believed to be under the influence of LSD rammed his pickup truck into two police cars.
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
“Shelby is waiting for something. He himself does not know what it is. When it comes he will either go back into the world from which he came, or sink out of sight in the morass of alcoholism or despair that has engulfed other vagrants.”