Matching Grant Challenge
BruceMatch
We’re slowly making headway in our annual fund drive, but not nearly fast enough to meet our make-or-break goal.  On the bright side, a generous CounterPuncher has stepped forward with a pledge to match every donation of $100 or more. Any of you out there thinking of donating $50 should know that if you donate a further $50, CounterPunch will receive an additional $100. And if you plan to send us $200 or $500 or more, he will give CounterPunch a matching $200 or $500 or more. Don’t miss the chance. Double your clout right now. Please donate.

Day 17

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)

pp1

or
cp-store

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

TV Fanboy

We Live in the Age of Superlatives

by DAVID MACARAY

There was a time, two or three decades ago, when people could sit down and watch a TV show—watch it, enjoy it, appreciate it, perhaps even contemplate parts of it the next day—without resorting to superlatives like “It’s the best show on TV!!” or “It’s the greatest TV show there ever was!!” Why superlatives? Why can’t we simply be entertained and leave it that?

Which brings us to Game of Thrones, the HBO fantasy series that’s causing otherwise reasonable people to go around saying preposterous things, like Thrones is the greatest show in the history of television. People, please. As Archie Bunker would say to Edith, you need to “stifle it.”

Full disclosure: I watch Thrones. I’ve seen every episode. I enjoy the show. I love Tyrion, I hate Cersei, I identify with Brienne of Tarth. Indeed, I owe HBO a debt of gratitude for providing me with an enjoyable hour on Sunday night, and like the Lannisters, I always pay my debts. Thank you, HBO, ye have done well. Game of Thrones more or less makes up for Veep and Carnivale.

But the best show in the history of television? Impossible. First of all, how can something be the “best show in the history of television” when 80-percent of it is lurid sex and violence? That’s like saying Hustler magazine is better than the New Yorker. Not to come off as prudish, but let’s be honest here. This show is all about sexual intercourse and murder, done in armor.

Granted, one could say the same about HBO’s earlier series, Rome, but at least that series had actual historical underpinnings, as there was, in fact, such a thing as the Roman Empire. Yes, you had copious amounts of intercourse, nudity, and bloodshed in Rome, but you also had Julius Caesar, Marc Antony and the Roman Senate.

But Thrones has no such historical antecedents. It’s the depiction of non-stop murder and sexual hi-jinx set against a totally fictional backdrop. The night may be dark and full of terrors, but those who insist that Game of Thrones is better than, say, the West Wing or the Larry Sanders Show may be full of crap.

One sees the same sort of gushing and hyper-ventilation aimed at The Walking Dead, AMC’s mega-hit zombie series. It’s a fun show. I liked it. I saw the first three seasons before realizing it wasn’t based on fact. Again, why can’t we simply “like” a television show—enjoy it, appreciate it, goof on it—without feeling compelled to coronate it?

People are so enthralled with the Walking Dead, the network has produced an accompanying spin-off called Talking Dead, where grown-up people sit on a sofa and talk about what they have just seen. It’s a televised chat-room. And they talk about this zombie caper with such solemnity and reverence, you’d think they were discussing Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason.

Again, I’m a fan of Thrones. There is no way I’m going to miss an episode. Was I thrilled when Joffrey died? Of course. Am I rooting for Khaleesi to succeed? Of course. Do I think we haven’t seen the last of Shae? It’s hard to say. But before I’d call Game of Thrones the best show, I’d join those other fellas in calling myself the King of the North.

David Macaray, an LA playwright and author (“It’s Never Been Easy:  Essays on Modern Labor,” 2nd edition), is a former union rep.  He can be reached at dmacaray@earthlink.net