"Small-Town Cheap"
Oh! Another Gomery commentary. In my defense, when a (former) prime minister appears before a commission of inquiry for the first time in more than a century, it commands attention, even mine. To say nothing of a sitting PM.
Small acts are often more defining about the character of a man. "Sometimes a matter of less moment, an expression or a jest, informs us better of [men's] characters and inclinations, than the most famous of sieges, the greatest armaments, or the bloodiest battles whatsoever," said Plutarch in his examination of remarkable historical lives.
We got a glimpse of one of these small acts at the Gomery Inquiry this week. Jean Chretien could not resist jabbing Justice Gomery with his charade about the golf balls. The golf ball stint had a dual purpose: it was simultaneously an instrument of revenge against Gomery and a distractor in the inquiry. In the strategic sense, it was a rehearsed action to distract attention. It was not coincidental. Clearly, one does not carry sets of golf balls of that sort in one's briefcase, just for the fun of it. It must have taken some amount of time to gather those balls for the show. And if they were easy to find in the collection of prime ministerial souvenirs, that also reveals something about the former PM.
It was a distractor because the affair of the golf ball was about $1200 dollars, a sum that pales in comparison to the mismanaged and the misdirected funds, to use polite language, that the Liberals funneled out of public coffers to reward some of their friends in Quebec. Suddenly, our minds were redirected to an issue worth twelve hundred dollars when there are hundreds of millions at stake. The question of golf balls was hardly the most serious of issue with which the inquiry has been dealing. And at the end of the day, the news media played the clip of the golf balls because it made for good theatre, even if it is a clown on stage. As Chretien said to reporters, refusing to answer questions on his way out: "I gave you guys enough stuff" in there. And he did, indeed.
The strategy was working but the performer was visibly overplaying the part. Chretien's lawyer realized that and tried to stop him, but Chretien could not help himself. He was enjoying the petty revenge aspect of the activity. He could hardly hide his glee in "sticking" it to Gomery, who had referred to the golf ball expense as "small-town cheap." He was having "too much fun."
Later, he could not again help himself, taking a shot at his successor, when he said that all PMs, from Macdonald to him (excluding therefore PM Martin) had worked hard to keep the country together.
Chretien's delight in the show-and-tell of the golf balls, his petty exclusion of Paul Martin in his comment about national unity, truly confirmed Gomery's comments about Chretien's high cheesiness factor. Most of us did not need further evidence, however.
Small acts are often more defining about the character of a man. "Sometimes a matter of less moment, an expression or a jest, informs us better of [men's] characters and inclinations, than the most famous of sieges, the greatest armaments, or the bloodiest battles whatsoever," said Plutarch in his examination of remarkable historical lives.
We got a glimpse of one of these small acts at the Gomery Inquiry this week. Jean Chretien could not resist jabbing Justice Gomery with his charade about the golf balls. The golf ball stint had a dual purpose: it was simultaneously an instrument of revenge against Gomery and a distractor in the inquiry. In the strategic sense, it was a rehearsed action to distract attention. It was not coincidental. Clearly, one does not carry sets of golf balls of that sort in one's briefcase, just for the fun of it. It must have taken some amount of time to gather those balls for the show. And if they were easy to find in the collection of prime ministerial souvenirs, that also reveals something about the former PM.
It was a distractor because the affair of the golf ball was about $1200 dollars, a sum that pales in comparison to the mismanaged and the misdirected funds, to use polite language, that the Liberals funneled out of public coffers to reward some of their friends in Quebec. Suddenly, our minds were redirected to an issue worth twelve hundred dollars when there are hundreds of millions at stake. The question of golf balls was hardly the most serious of issue with which the inquiry has been dealing. And at the end of the day, the news media played the clip of the golf balls because it made for good theatre, even if it is a clown on stage. As Chretien said to reporters, refusing to answer questions on his way out: "I gave you guys enough stuff" in there. And he did, indeed.
The strategy was working but the performer was visibly overplaying the part. Chretien's lawyer realized that and tried to stop him, but Chretien could not help himself. He was enjoying the petty revenge aspect of the activity. He could hardly hide his glee in "sticking" it to Gomery, who had referred to the golf ball expense as "small-town cheap." He was having "too much fun."
Later, he could not again help himself, taking a shot at his successor, when he said that all PMs, from Macdonald to him (excluding therefore PM Martin) had worked hard to keep the country together.
Chretien's delight in the show-and-tell of the golf balls, his petty exclusion of Paul Martin in his comment about national unity, truly confirmed Gomery's comments about Chretien's high cheesiness factor. Most of us did not need further evidence, however.
posted by kaqchikel at
2/10/2005 11:21:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home