Steve Sailer wrote July 24, 2005: “Mickey Kaus called Luke the “human Echelon Project, for the prodigious amount of interviewing and transcribing he does of who’s saying what around LA. Luke even interviewed me. But the bonus reason for reading Luke’s blog is so you can then read the libelously hilarious “Luke Ford Fan Blog.”
From the Luke Ford Fan Blog archives:
February 6, 2004:
Outrageous! It’s hard to believe that these sorts of things still happen in America in the year 2004. But obviously they do. Luke Ford, moral leader, scholar, memoirist, raconteur, and all-around colossus of the blogosphere, was the victim of an outrageous act of discrimination last Saturday: he was prevented from being a panelist at the American Cinema Foundation’s roundtable discussion on blogging and the news and entertainment media.
Cathy Seipp, the event’s moderator and prime mover, told Luke that the decision to exclude him was based purely on merit, that he, the Internet’s premiere vanity blogger, simply wasn’t good enough to sit alongside Los Angeles’ leading bloggers. What an utterly implausible argument, especially as it comes only days after Luke’s recent “triumphant” stint as a guest blogger on Protocols (see below), which has led to upcoming guest blogging assignments on LA Observed, Instapundit, Kausfiles, and NYTimes.com. Yet somehow this in-demand blogger was cruelly rejected.
Let’s compare Luke Ford’s credentials against those of the actual panelists to see if any sensible person could possibly justify this outrageous snub:
• Luke Ford is a published author of a scholarly monograph (and will soon release his second book, an absorbing autobiography of his fascinating life). How many of the panelists have produced scholarly monographs? Nil. (Roger L. Simon is the author of detective novels, but these will hardly be mistaken for Luke’s treatise, which Publisher’s Weekly lauded as “rambling,” “contradictory,” and “offensive.” To the best of my knowledge none of the rest have nary a book credit between them.)
• Luke Ford was recently the subject of a major study on Internet celebrity by a team of leading researchers at Stanford University. How many of the panelists have also been studied by scholars at a prestigious (or for that matter non-prestigious) university? Nil.
• Luke Ford is the beloved moral leader to millions of lost souls across the blogosphere — poor, pathetic, snivelling losers in need of guidance because they are too stupid or lazy to think for themselves. How many of the panelists are so blessed? How many even go to church or synagogue on a regular basis? Nil.
• And most significantly, Luke Ford has a non-ironical fan blog. How many of the panelists have a fan blog? Nil. (The only other moral leader of Luke Ford’s stature with a fan blog is Michael Medved. But Medved, although a superb intellectual and moral leader in his own right, is not a blogger. Besides his fan blog is something of a joke, I think, although I have a rather childish sense of humour and I’m not very good at determining these things.)
I submit to you, my dear readers and fellow Fordophiles, that the evidence that our moral leader has been wronged is overwhelming. It is persuasive. It is irrefutable. Orthodox Jew Luke Ford is the victim of anti-religious discrimination! He is the Rosa Parks of the blogosphere! Just as Parks was denied a seat on a bus in Montgomery, Alabama in 1955 for no reason other than her race, Luke was denied a seat on the panel of the American Cinema Foundation’s discussion on blogging for no reason other than his faith. Outrageous!
(I suppose that there is another possible explanation for Luke Ford’s exclusion: jealously. It wasn’t long ago that Luke was named one of Los Angeles’ ten best bloggers. Who was notably absent from that list? None other than Cathy Seipp — the same Cathy Seipp who placed herself on the panel of leading LA bloggers! You may recall that at the time I wrote how painful this must have been for Cathy. Perhaps she still hasn’t gotten over the humiliation? And yet I have rejected this explanation because, well, frankly I don’t think that you can sue a person for jealousy, and I’m hoping to be called as an expert witness at the upcoming Luke Ford anti-discrimination trial where I will finally meet my moral leader in person — I just hope I don’t faint in his presence like I did when I saw Clay Aiken during the Seattle stop of the American Idol tour last fall. Boy, was that embarrassing!)
To be fair, I should point out that Luke was allowed to ask one question from the floor during the political segment of last Saturday’s event. Yet even here Cathy Seipp, according to published accounts, snorted her disapproval. I’m of the opinion that Luke’s question simply reaffirms the argument that he belonged on the panel. Please judge for yourself. Mr. Ford waved his hand and when called upon politely asked:
“I want to know if blogging has ever gotten the panelists —-?”
Notice the complete absence of a rambling introductory sentence. His question was concise, relevant, and to the point. I must admit, however, that I’m a little unclear as to the hidden word. I blame myself for this as I’m not very good at word games and I can’t make out this four letter word. All I know is that it was about politics, blogging and thus on-topic. If someone knows, please contact me at lukefordfanblog@yahoo.com. Thanks.)
UPDATE: That rat bastard! I have just been informed what the missing word was. Luke Ford stood up at the American Cinema Foundation and shamelessly asked: “I want to know if blogging has ever gotten the panelists laid?”
I feel sick. I would like to apologise unreservedly for all those I have unjustly criticised, especially Cathy Seipp. It’s no wonder Luke wasn’t allowed on the panel. Just think of the havoc he would have caused with his outrageous behaviour. In fact, I’m shocked that Cathy even took his question from the floor. I’m surprised that he was allowed to purchase two tickets for the event: one for himself and, Luke being ever the optimist, one for a nonexistent date. I’m shocked that he is even allowed out of the house, er, hovel. It’s one thing to be obnoxious in a private situation with his friends (assuming he has any left), but in a public place! What on earth was Horrid Boy thinking? The only thing I can come up with was that he was so excited to see Shiksababe Moxie in person that he forgot to take his lithium tablets.
April 1, 2004:
The Dog Ate My Homework
This is an embarrassing story, but it has to be told.
So I was planning to interview Mr. Luke Ford about religion and sundry topics. I’ve only recently become interested in such matters, whereas Luke knows more about religion than anyone I know. (Not that I actually know Luke. [I only pretend to know Luke.] {But he still knows more about religion than all the other people I pretend to know.}])
With his many years of religious study and his supreme natural intelligence (185 IQ), Luke is a very intimidating figure, indeed. What if I ask him a foolish question? What if I unwittingly say something offensive? Suffice to say I was frightened.
I set to work studying religion (Judaism and Christianity) and philosophy. Due to my Internet use-induced limited attention span, I no longer have the patience to read books (or even long articles). I still buy books mind you, but I just page through them and put them in boxes with thousands of other books I’ve bought but never actually read. I can, however, listen to books (and lectures) on my MP3 player as I go for walkabouts. I do this a lot.
A few weeks ago I took a “geek test,” suggested by Jackie D. (of Ohio by way of London), that included the question: Do you listen to books on tape? “YES!” I answered not realizing that this made me a dork. I’m a dork² when you consider that I like to listen to my books and lectures on walkabouts AS I TAKE NOTES! It is just a matter of time before some neighbourhood toughs beat me senseless with hockey sticks as I walk down the street listening to a lecture on neo-Platonism, stopping to take notes every 15 seconds. I must look absolutely gormless.
Recently I was listening to a lecture on Maimonides and it started to rain. I put my notepad in my pocket forgetting to zip it up. When I got home my notepad was soaked through. All the ink had run. My many thousand notes, my many weeks of homework, were all for not.
How can I come up with probing questions to ask Luke about religion and sundry topics without my notes? Alas I cannot. I must go back and re-listen to all my lectures.
This unfortunate event happened a couple of weeks ago. I have been so emotionally devastated by the loss of my notes (not to mention my fear that the G-d of the Jews doesn’t want me asking Luke difficult philosophically-informed questions that might lessen his faith) that I have been unable to return to my research. G-d willing, I shall try again tomorrow.
May 21, 2004:
Book Review
XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without a Shul
Luke Ford (2004)
Self-published by Horrid Boy Press, Beverly Hills, California, 90210
Luke Ford’s memoir of his time as a porn journalist begins with an attack upon our moral leader by a troglodyte named Mike Albo. Luke’s head is smashed “repeatedly” against a light pole causing severe brain damage. Thank goodness Luke survived, otherwise there would be no autobiography for his fans and followers to study and savour. At least that’s what I thought before I actually started reading “XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without a Shul.” After plowing through all 67,000+ words (consisting mostly of cut and pasted emails, transcribed phone conversations and IM sessions with various pornographers, adult film stars, and Orthodox rabbis) my view is somewhat less enthusiastic. But first a little background.
I would be lying if I said that I had no knowledge of Luke’s “old” life before I started my fan blog late last year. My earliest memory of Luke Ford was an appearance with sexologist Bob Berkowitz on eYada.com, a defunct Internet radio station, back in 2001. Luke, speaking in the soft voice of a very naughty boy caught in the act, was in full self-flagellation mode over his dual existence as a porn reporter/critic and deeply religious orthodox Jewish convert. Although Luke’s version of this conversation differs from mine (I don’t recall Berkowitz being nearly as judgmental as Luke suggests in his memoir), his appearance left an impression on me. I recall checking out LF.com, but not being particularly interested in how the porn sausage is made, I soon drifted away and almost completely forgot about Luke Ford.
A couple of years ago I became interested in the writings of James C. Bennett, a UPI columnist and theorist of the Anglosphere. Looking around UPI’s website I found another columnist, Cathy Seipp, who wrote mostly about cultural matters from a centre-right perspective. There aren’t many conservative female commentators and I was intrigued. When UPI stopped offering its content online for free, I searched Cathy Seipp’s name to see if there was another way to read her weekly column. I discovered that she had a blog and through Cathy’s World I was reacquainted, much to my surprise, with Luke. I wondered, why would a highly-respected journalist like Cathy Seipp be carrying on with an enfant terrible like Luke Ford?
Unfortunately there is no answer to this question in Luke’s new autobiography “XXX-Communicated.” (I assume that the explanation behind their tempestuous on-again, off-again romance lies in the power of love — or at least good sex — to overwhelm a woman’s commonsense.) Instead the reader is treated to a steady stream of disjointed anecdotes about some of the most revolting human beings on the planet. It makes for a rather depressing study of what the human male is capable of when freed from divinely-inspired moral guidance, at least that is what Luke Ford would have his readers believe.
Luke defined the aim of his porn research in highminded terms: “I’ll penetrate the most religiously-challenged corner of modernity with my newly-acquired Jewish conscience and come out the other side with insights into the human condition.” This sounds reasonable. What is less reasonable is how Luke goes about doing this: i.e., by making and acting in his own adult film titled, quite inappropriately, “What Women Want.”
After somehow managing to raise the necessary funds, Luke shoots his video:
For the introduction to my epic, I have Kimberly [Kummings star of the Christmas special celebrating the birth of the baby Lord Jesus called “Oh Cum On Ye Faces”] get down on her knees in front of me and the camera while I deliver my lines based on Dennis Prager’s teachings.
I’m no expert, of course, but one has to wonder about the sanity of a man who thinks that porn consumers want to watch a video featuring the director prattling on about Dennis Prager’s (a conservative Jewish theologian) views on male-female relations. Talk about a mood killer. And indeed, the market for a Prager-informed group sex (one woman and five men) video failed to materialize, much to Luke’s surprise and disappointment: “[D]istributors return the movie by the case … I end up giving away copies to my friends at my Reform temple.” The rest of Luke’s autobiography confirms his otherworldly mental state.
In chapter 3 we are introduced to the bizarro world of porn journalism. It’s not a happy place. Luke feuds with his fellow writers, people he apparently finds compelling but most readers, I suspect, will find merely stupid and boring. Mark Kernes, of the Adult Video News, is described as “old and ugly … he looks out at the world with beady, suspicious, pig-like eyes, squinting between jowels [sic] of fat.” Luke wasn’t very popular with his colleagues.
Even at this early point, Luke’s memoir is largely a cut and paste affair. Unable to shape his material into a coherent whole made up of persuasively argued parts, Luke relies instead on recycling passages from his diary. For example, as part of his “research” Luke visits fifty-something porn queen Kitten Natividad:
Aware of Kitten’s voracious appetite for young men, I open the back of my 1982 one-ton Dodge van and dig under the mattress and pillows for a pack of condoms. I pull out two, put them in my pocket, and walk to her apartment.
[…]
I ask Kitten about her breasts. She raises her top and shows them to me. They’re huge … I fondle her bosom. If she were any other old woman, I wouldn’t touch her. But Kitten’s a star and this is an experience I’ll write about in a book one day.”
Scholars, like Luke, call this field work, I think.
Kitten gives me a big long hug. We fall to the wood floor, drop our clothes, and roll into the missionary position. I slide on my rubber and slide into her. “Put your fingers up my ass,” she commands.
Excruciating details follow. Luke’s telling of his sexual encounter with Kitten Natividad has the fingerprints of his editor, Cathy Seipp, all over it. One can easily imagine the bawdy Miss Seipp, sitting next to Luke as they go over his manuscript, saying “don’t forget the bum reference. That’s the kind of writing readers expect these days. I give it too them and you should, too.”
Luke cuts quite a path through the porn community, having sex with porn stars while moralizing about the evils of promiscuity. Not surprisingly, enemies are made all over the San Fernando Valley. Luke’s biggest foe is a gentleman named Mike Albo of Hustler magazine’s “Erotic Video Guide”:
You are a total moron. You are an idiot. You are a loser. I’ve been hearing about all your Internet activities. You’re a fucking goofball. You just better hope that we don’t meet up because it’s not going to be a pretty situation. Judging from the yarmulke you wear on your pointy little pinhead, you must be a religious man. If I were you, I would pray that you don’t run into me.
[…]
You fucking faggot, I just want to let you know that I’m going to kill you. You’re a real dickhead. I don’t know how you think that there’s going to be no consequences for the shit that you do. But there is, big time. And I’m going to love being one of the people that delivers it to you, pal.
Luke’s research not only angers the porn community, it also causes his religious friends to shake their heads in disbelief. Even Dennis Prager, Luke’s Jewish father figure, abandons him:
Since I have allegedly played such a positive role in your life, I would assume good works would flow — especially toward me — from you. Apparently my influence has been nil except in the most superficial sense. I truly am curious — does it bother you how you have alienated me?
But Luke carries on undeterred, convinced that by exposing the porn industry’s negligence over AIDS he is saving lives.
Page after page follows of Luke’s relentless anti-porn muckraking and the widespread animosity that results. It’s depressing fare, but the occasional amusing anecdote breaks the tedium. For instance, one day at the drug store:
A middle-aged woman approaches me. “I’m getting a special feeling about you,” she says and hands me her card. She’s a psychic. “You should come see me soon. I’ll give you a special rate.”
Coupon-clipper Luke isn’t one to pass up a bargain:
I have my tarot cards read ($30) and they seem to unveil my life. Moved, I pour out my problems.
A believer, I now visit the gypsy regularly. On her instructions, I buy candles from her for $100 each and exotic spices ($200) that I mix with water and pour over myself in the shower before leaving for synagogue Sabbath morning.
I buy crystals ($150) from her that I grasp in my hand every day when I dream about what I want. I buy a charm ($100) to put in my pillow.
[…]
After spending $1200, receiving no further improvements in my lot, I give up on the psychic.
What a shame. At least Luke, unlike all the psychic’s other customers, got the “special rate.”
Mostly though the book chronicles Luke’s immersion in the world of porn and his rapid moral, physical, and psychological decline. As a sign of his deterioration, Chaim Amalek, one of Luke’s many “personalities,” appears. As the book becomes more introspective it also becomes more interesting (and creepy).
Near the end of his memoir, Luke visits Israel in an attempt to find himself. Just as he begins to experience a measure of healing and happiness the book abruptly stops. The reader is left with more questions than answers.
I hope I’m not leaving the impression that “XXX-Communicated” is more coherent than it really is. In truth, it’s a bit of an organizational mess. Although the memoir develops mostly along chronological lines, every so often Luke throws in a thematic chapter. For example, chapter seven is purportedly about race. But Luke doesn’t do essays. And it shows. The chapter is a hodgepodge of personal reflections (on his sexual conquests of black women), intemperate observations about race and pornography, and relentless questioning of black male actors about their penises (size, blood flow, etc.), a topic about which Luke is oddly fascinated. For all his scholarly pretensions, Luke obviously hasn’t spent nearly as much time in the stacks as he has out in the field. The seminal work on this subject is the late Calvin Hernton’s 1965 book “Sex and Racism in America,” which is still strikingly relevant today. But Luke isn’t interested. In fact, he quickly loses interest in the topic altogether and instead offers off-topic profiles of white performers, including “good friend” Kendra Jade.
We learn an awful lot about porn journalists like Mike Albo in Luke’s memoir, so much so it almost reads like the unauthorized Mike Albo story, but nothing about the people who are important in Luke’s life today, most especially real journalist Cathy Seipp. How did Luke meet Cathy? What was her initial impression of him? Was it love at first sight? How many dates did it take before she got lucky and intimately experienced the self-proclaimed “Deon Sanders Of Lovers” in action? On average how many times per day did they have sex? Five times? Ten? More? Perhaps this more recent phase of Luke Ford’s life will be explored in volume two of “XXX-Communicated: When Luke Met Cathy.” In the meantime, I can’t recommend volume one of our moral leader’s life story to any but Luke’s most dedicated fans and friends.
Overall Grade: B+
Strengthens: Amusing in places; some psychological insight into what makes Horrid Boy tick
Weaknesses: Choppy writing; poor organization; general incoherence
May 25, 2004:
Feel the Love!
One of the cool things about being a Luke Ford fan is that I’m part of a very exclusive club. In fact, beside myself, Cecile DuBois and Cathy Seipp, I can’t think of another fan club member. This is why I have the shortest blogroll in the blogosphere. I suspect that it will soon get shorter still. Cecile is clearly going through her Luke Ford phase — you know how moody teenagers are. Now that N’Sync are getting back together, I wouldn’t be surprised if the life-sized Luke Ford posters come down from her bedroom walls to be replaced with more age-appropriate fare.
It’s not just that almost no-one likes Luke Ford. More interesting is the intense loathing that he provokes in otherwise tolerant, caring, and reasonable people. I’ve seen this in my own social circle. All I have to do is mention his name and my usually placid Canadian friends become enraged. Fearing for my life, I don’t mention that I’m the author of his #1 (and only) fan site.
Substantiating evidence is hardly lacking, but here is a small selection of reader comments from the Protocols website during Luke’s short stint as a guest blogger:
When are you leaving Protocols?
Luke, I don’t understand, is this some sort of sociological experiment on your part? … We can’t take much more, and it has only been one day.
stop! please! no more!
why is this person tolerated on this site? He’s offensive!
I’m not sure what the point was of having you as a guest blogger. You seem to have taken over Protocols — where are the usual contributers? … Have you ever considered trying to look at life from other people’s points of view, and not purely your own?
This man is a sicko
Luke, in essence, is an asshole.
What has happened to Protocols this last week. Amzing [sic] how one guest blogger can ruin this formerly thoughtful, sophisticated meditation. I used to look to Protocols every day … Now I grimace at the immuturity, unbridled anger & hatred (self hatred?) and general creepiness.
goodbye. I’ve had enough
This site has hit an all time new low
When is your stint as a guest blogger over?
Aren’t you supposed to be gone by now?
Oh Crap!!!! You again, Ford? Dammit, can’t you just GO AWAY
Luke, you’ve violated us all by imposing your sick self upon us and by misrepresenting yourself as a frum jew when really you’re a very very sick man.
That’s it. I’m not looking at Protocols again until the week is over. More time to check out other blogs now, or rearrange my sock drawer.
I think I am beginning to understand why LA, rather some of it’s self-absorbed residents are so hated.
we dont like when a person who isnt too intelligent, funny, clever, or interesting posts non stop on a blog that used to be informative and entertaining.
Your posts are so long and boring its unbelievable. Never before have I seen someone write so much and say so little. Please stop. Now.
i can almost guarantee that this luke is one weird creepy freak in real life.
Don’t try to stuff your religious position down everyone’s throught. (God, you are worse than Prager.)
You are a very sick person … I do not accept you as a fellow Jew. You were converted under false pretenses, and you have failed to live up to even the most basic standards of what it means to be a frum Jew. We didn’t ask you to join, but we’re now asking you to leave.
I don’t find your satire funny … you come across here as a bigot
Luke – You are the worst kind of white jewish trash.
I truly hope to never see you on this blog again!
your endless posts felt like the guy who shows up at a dinner party and won’t stop talking, interrupting, pontificating until all that remain in the room are him and his exhausted hosts.
leave these poor people and their blog alone!!!
How about writing about something other than your narscistic little world. Other than your friends, and your personal predilications?
this page has gone to hell
The bottom line is, he’s a sensationalist jerk. Regardless if people call him bad names. What’s his deal? When is his guest-blogging stint done? I want to know because if this goes on much longer, I’m going to remove the Protocols link from my blog.
Personal insults aside, the problem with Luke Ford – or, shall we say, one of the more serious problems – is that he uses very provocative language but his meaning is never clear. What is satire and what is not? Is he trying to convey a point, or simply to upset people? He certainly has succeeded at the latter.
I want to put the link back up on my blog, but I have to wait until he stops posting.
Most people simply hated the interminable, self-referential posts, many of which were copied verbatim from his personal blog, some from as much as two or three years ago.
Get Luke off of here!
Luke – From reading your posts the past few days, I’ve come to one conclusion – you’re one strange dude.
Soon, soon it will be over.
go away Luke
SHUT UP NOW!!!!
This luke individual is a truly horrible read. Truly horrible. Too horrible even to be fun-horrible. F— your awful blogging, Luke, and go write something else.
Hey Luke mate! I don’t bloody understand why you insist on writing about nothing but rubbish on this blog.
You have such a hard-on for that windbag Dennis Prager. You guys both deserve each other and I wish you’d stick to what you both do best pontificate about religion and morality, rather than pretend to be experts on the Middle East.
I am encouraging all readers of Protocols to call Luke Ford at home. Number available through anywho.com
WTF is going on here? I’ve landed in planet WTF.
I’m confused. I thought this was a religious site, not a sex blog.
you are a sick man
I would say this site has turned into pure garbage
Luke, you are truly dumber than I thought.
speaking on behalf of the Protocols readership, its time that you stopped posting altogether. Instead of spending your time posting this stupidity, why don’t you go and talk to a psychiatrist
When did this site become the new lukeford.com?
How much longer, Lord, how much longer?
Luke, you are one big sicko. Get lost and get some help.
Luke, I am assuming that this is another one of your pathetic ironical little test(e)s. Get a life
I am really losing intest in this blog. Is the point now solely to shock, I thought that is what Maddona is for. I don’t get this or most of your comments, this is really just getting old.
I too am getting very sick of this blog and I am fed up with LukeFord making Protocols his own little freak show.
Luke, we don’t like you and we don’t like your B.S. attention grabbing announcements. Please find some other blog to ruin.
Yeah. Get rid of LukeFord. Give us back the old protocols
I need some Midol. Anyone here got some?
OK, damn Luke, this is too much!
YUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Luke Ford, you are a moron.
someone wake me up when lukeford is no longer posting.
END THIS MADNESS!!!!
Still making friends wherever you go, I see, Luke.
This is getting painful.
Luke Ford makes me ashamed to be Jewish.
Lukeford, do you have a life? What happened to Protocols? Farewell, I’m getting bored to tears
This is too much. Shut up and go away!
luke ford, go away.
This site has hit an all time new low
You love to push your limits and see just how far you can go … you really have to sit down, listen and learn from some good mussar shmusses from a good rabbi and live your life by the credo “do unto others as YOU WANT THEM TO DO UNTO YOU”.
Luke, yuck, your posts stink
Get rid of lukeford, bring back protocols. Protocols is my cup of coffee every day and now this sludge all week long. Help!
Get this long-winded pervert off the site and bring back the type of bloging that made protocols interesting
Enough Already!
When is this jerk’s turn as guest blogger over?
Give Protocols back to those that can write, (not u Luke)
this really sucks. likeford trying to promote lukeford all the time. what fun. cant imagine it sucking any more
what the hell is going on around here?
Dude, get a life. Your posts are way too long and boring. One post about a subject is enough, we don’t need 5 of them!
We miss the days when Protocols was pithy and interesting.
Why is this guest blogger so obsessed with sex?
this guy is really freaking me out
Is this another one of your “satires”?
This Ford is an absolute ghoul.
Most of these guest bloggers have been awful. There is no question that this one takes the cake. Its so highly irritating and not interesting.
grow up, this was a serious blog once upon a time
If any of us were interested ONLY in you, we’d go to your blog, Luke.
I can be the first to say Goodbye and Good Riddance. You succeeded in making the last 7 days feel like 7 years. Perhaps now you can spend more time with your therapist, trying to figure out why you are so dedicated to antagonizing others.
Luke Ford responds to his critics:
Thanks. You love me. You really love me.
Luke isn’t delusional. He genuinely loves/needs to be criticized. I often wondered why he didn’t tell me to stop posting nasty material on my fan blog. Just the opposite: no matter how awful my entries, Luke would request that I post more often and write even meaner stuff. Apparently this is Luke’s MO with everyone. According to his memoir, an ex-girlfriend once said to Luke:
I have criticized you up one end and down the other and it’s wonderful. It’s the most fulfilling thing in the world because you don’t defend it. You don’t fight it. You don’t get angry. You just take it. And for people who don’t like conflict such as myself, it’s a beautiful thing.
Luke Ford is the ultimate human punching bag. This is why we — fans and critics alike — need him. What does this say about us?
June 16, 2004:
Dear Mr. Ford:
Hello.
How are you doing?
I’m doing fine.
Are you a crazy person?
I ask because I explicitly told you not to do something, and not only did you turn around and do exactly the opposite of what I so nicely requested for you not to do, but you did it twice! You seem to have an odd (pathological?) need to cross people so they will dislike (hate?) you.
Keeping with the spirit of my new “G” rated blog, I will take the high road, turn the other cheek, and not give you the pleasure of being the object of my justified anger.
Good day, Mr. Ford.
The Producers
Luke Ford has a new book coming out titled The Producers: Profiles in Frustration. It consists of a series of interviews Luke conducted with 68 “major” Hollywood players.
I expect this will be Luke’s most successful book to date (which, truth be told, isn’t saying much). Luke is no essayist (duh!), but he can blog (if you ignore the fact that he has recently taken over Protocols and gone bonkers with 20 odd post per day, most of which are inane drivel). But Luke’s real talent (to extent he has any talent — real or imagined) is in interviewing people (so long as he can find the self-discipline not to ask his subjects grossly inappropriate sexual questions). Assuming that Luke (or his editor) kept the questions on-topic, The Producers should be much better received than A History of X: 100 Years of Sex in Film. (I challenge anyone to find a book given poorer reviews on Amazon.com than A History of X.) I say this because judging from the proofs it appears that there is very little of Luke in the book (which for anyone who waded through Luke’s sordid autobiography, like I reluctantly did, knows very well is a good thing — a very good thing, indeed).
That being said, I will not buy The Producers. I’m afraid the subject matter doesn’t interest me. The love affair many Americans have with Hollywood leaves me cold. What I would like to see from Luke is a book very much like The Producers, but with interviews of significant religious figures, theologians, clergy, rabbis, philosophers, and ordinary people discussing faith in the modern world. I’m especially interested in the relationship between religion and reason, both the challenge to belief from philosophy (beginning with Spinoza) and more especially historical research and comparative religious studies over the past 100 or so years. How do contemporary Jews and Christians defend their beliefs against all that we now know about Ancient Near East mythology? This historical knowledge would seem to fundamentally undermine the idea that Judaism and Christianity have unique claims to be “true” religions. Such a topic interests me far more than Luke asking questions such as: “Do you think girls are icky?”
Gentleman Blogger
Luke Ford is back on Protocols for a third (and seemingly permanent) stint as a “guest” blogger. The reader response is mixed, a vast improvement over the violent reaction to stints one and two. Perhaps people just need to get to know Our Moral Leader a little bit before coming to appreciate his brilliance. Or perhaps not. Luke does have some rather determined critics. For example, Shlomo writes: “Two weeks after your guest blogging was supposed to end, you’re still posting mindless and inappropriate trash that nobody with a mind less perverted than yours would be interested in reading. Get off this site, Lukeford. You’re not wanted!”
I can honestly say that Luke Ford has never written anything that I’ve found (too) offensive. This, apparently, puts me in the distinct minority. It certainly isn’t the case that I’m hard to offend. In fact, I’m offended all the time. For example, I just checked out Jamye Waxman’s blog.
I remember Jamye from eYada.com, an Internet radio station that went out of business during the dotcom crash of 2001. Jamye produced, and sometimes hosted, sexologist Bob Berkowitz’s show, which featured regular guest Luke Ford. But I seldom listened to the Bob Berkowitz show because I found it offensive. Instead, I mostly remember Jamye from the inoffensive Chaunce Hayden Show, which she also produced. Jamye spent much of her time searching the eYada closet for the official ___ bucket, the show’s main prop. I don’t think that I’ll ever get out of my head Chaunce constantly yelling, “Jamye, get the bucket! We’re going to need it for our next guest.” Yet I was never offended.
Chaunce Hayden was a talented radio host, but Jamye Waxman was the star of the show: a feminine presence and voice of reason. And when I say voice, I mean Jamye had the sexiest voice in the history of radio (perhaps in the history of all womankind). So I was thrilled to follow a link kindly provided by Luke on Protocols to Jamye’s blog. It didn’t take me long (less than 2 seconds) to be offended.
Since my blog is now “G” rated, I can neither link to the site nor detail the parts that upset me most. (Although I might be able to slip in Jamye’s statement: ‘[I’m going] to make up a number of shirts that say Vote Kerry and wear them tight, right on my ____ …”) To be fair, Jamye’s blog isn’t all sexual politics. There is a moving story about a woman who needed 50 cents for the subway, and Jamye almost has a kind word for the grieving Nancy Reagan.
Rebecca Schoenkopf, Commie Girl from the OC Weekly, also mentions Nancy Reagan, in passing, in her latest column. Rebecca is a woman I met thanks to Luke Ford. (One of the benefits of knowing Luke is that he goes through a lot of women and it’s sometimes possible to hook up with his hand-me-downs.) Rebecca was briefly Luke’s girlfriend, and when I say briefly I mean their love affair lasted for part of one phone conversation, which is about how long Luke’s charms work on the average woman.
Not that Rebecca is average in any other way. She is a very sweet girl — when she puts her mind to it. But she is also something of a conspiracy theorist. Consider, for example, Rebecca on Ronald Reagan’s alleged traitorous dealings with the Ayatollah Khomeini:
He made a secret agreement with the Ayatollah. Do you have any idea what that means? While Ted Koppel was going on Nightline every night to somberly update us on the hostage crisis — 53 Americans held in Iran … Ronald Reagan sent William Casey to promise arms to Iran … if they would keep the hostages until after the election.
Good grief. Apparently they no longer teach critical thinking skills at NYU. By the way, how old was Rebecca Schoenkopf during the Iranian hostage crisis? Six! And how many six year olds in 1980 stayed up on a pre-school night to watch Nightline at 11:30 pm? My point exactly! Where did Rebecca get her understanding of the Reagan years from? It certainly wasn’t from personal experience. I detect the influence of unreconstructed Marxist historian Howard Zinn. How else to explain this passage from Orange County’s beloved Commie Girl:
Ronald Reagan was not a good man. He was not a beacon of optimism and hope. He was an embarrassment … he was a pathological liar … he joked about bombing the USSR on radio … and, perhaps most unforgivably, he declared a war on the poor in place of the war on poverty … He turned our noblest compassion — made concrete by FDR and … the Johnson administration — upside-down until we were calling poor women with children lazy and stupid and spitting with anger that they would dare need our help.
Ronald Reagan was a good man. Nobody who knew him personally disliked him. He was a beacon of optimism and hope to Natan Sharansky and others in the Soviet Gulag. He was a leader to admire. He was pathologically lied about by leftists. He courageously called the USSR an “evil empire,” leading to days of derisive editorials and opinion columns in the New York Times, the same newspaper that published Walter Duranty’s propaganda denying the facts about Stalin’s forced collectivization which killed 7 million Soviet peasants. I could go on, point-by-point, but I actually like Rebecca (a lot).
Here is a list of some other things that offend me: the BBC, the CBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, PBS, NPR, Air America, the NY Times, the LA Times, the Boston Globe, the Seattle Times, the Vancouver Sun, the Guardian, the Independent (which is even worse than the Guardian), Slate, Salon, Noam Chomsky (America’s oldest teenager), Michael Moore, Amy-Jill Levine (an Orthodox Jew who teaches New Testament Studies at Vanderbilt University Divinity School [!]), and every university in the English-speaking world, save for Hillsdale College and maybe BYU.
A couple of weeks ago I visited my old university and wandered around campus, thinking about the “good” old days. I walked past the quad where I, along with thousands of other useless idiots, protested against Gulf War I. I couldn’t help but look at the bulletin boards outside the offices of my old profs. Professor after professor had posted offensive cartoons and political signs, in some cases covering their entire doors, expressing their hatred for Bush the Moron and Sharon the Nazi. Every cartoon and political banner — without exception — expressed the politics of the hard left. I hoped that when I got to the Germanic Studies department things might change, if only in the interest of good taste and historical shame. But no. Imagine the moral absurdity of Germanic Studies professors labeling the American president a fascist! How childish and unprofessional. Think of a young student, say Cecile DuBois, visiting her professor to talk about an assignment and having to walk past this material.
Which brings me back to Luke Ford. Perhaps in person he is the most obnoxious chap imaginable (I doubt it), but as a writer is he anywhere near as offensive as your average Germanic Studies professor? Hardly. Yes, Luke does write provocatively at times. Okay, pretty much all the time. But you have to keep in mind that Luke is a serial exaggerator. He likes to take a serious point and exaggerate it to absurd proportions for attention-seeking effect. If you realize this, and are willing to do a little bit of de-exaggerating as you read along, you will find that his arguments are actually quite thoughtful.
And yes, Luke does, occasionally, write about his sex life in somewhat explicit terms. Certainly, there are few topics more offensive to listen to than men talking about their sex lives. But Luke is never boastful. If anything he seems deeply troubled by the fact that he’s a sexual being. I don’t know why he fusses so much, but I do know that his writings on this and other subjects fail to offend me. Shlomo might not agree, but I think of him as Luke Ford: Gentleman Blogger.
Update: Oh no, Shlomo. I wrote this entry before I checked out Luke’s latest comments on AIDS. Never mind. Move along. Nothing to see here.
June 24, 2004:
XXX Communicated: The “G” Rated Review
Here is an edited version of my review of Luke Ford’s memoir XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without a Shul. Some material had to be deleted so as not to offend the delicate sensibilities of 15 year old girls who love both Luke Ford and Doris Day.
The published version of XXX-Communicated features multiple blurbs (the best being by hot intellectual babe Heather MacDonald: “A fable for our time. Heart-breaking yet uplifting. You’ll cry, you’ll laugh, you’ll study your Torah!”), three forewords, one epilogue, and a revised final chapter, all of which I did not have the opportunity to read in an earlier draft of the manuscript.
The first foreword is by Cathy (not Catherine) Seipp. By using her non-professional name, Miss Seipp is obviously trying to distance herself from Luke, or at least his past. She makes this clear in her opening sentence: “The story you are about to read took place years before Luke Ford met me …” In other words, “don’t confuse me with any of Luke’s XXX-rated girlfriends who appear throughout the book.”
How could a sensible observer make such a mistake? Oh, I don’t know. How about because Cathy tells us that Luke is “handsome,” “beautiful,” “stylish,” and “goo-goo eye[able].” Her lusty infatuation apparently explains why she calls Luke’s appalling p___ video What Women What, “a small masterpiece.” She also calls Luke’s blog “Pinteresque.” I don’t know what this means, but I suspect it is another hormone-induced, over-the-top compliment.
If Luke Ford looked like Ted Kaczynski (and let’s face it, there are more than a few similarities between the two, especially if Luke ever stops using Grecian Formula) there would be a heck of a lot less of this female gushing going on.
Cathy continues: “Some readers (always women …) read his memoir and are moved to tears.” Why? Are these tears of laughter because the book is so disjointed, and they can’t believe that Luke thought it was ready for publication? Or perhaps these are the tears of ex-girlfriends who find that Luke has no sense of privacy and is writing about them and their odd sexual proclivities?
We do find out how Luke and Cathy meet: it was on the way to an orgy. Luke Ford was disguised as a moral leader and Cathy, a Hittite priestess. Cool!
Foreword II is from Dave Deutsch, the world’s worst Jewish comedian, which features more lavish praise. This time with a disturbing homo-erotic vibe.
Foreword III is from the great Mike Albo. (I love that guy!) For a fat, bald, three-pack-a-day smoker, heroin addict, and rageaholic, the ol’ boy sure can write.
Luke has also re-written the final chapter. It is quite touching. If I was a girl, I probably would have cried upon reading that one of Luke’s rabbis called him “the most evil man he ever met.” But I’m not a girl, so I laughed.
Luke goes on: “I want to believe that I have written a good book. I want to believe my story has a point … I want to believe that my story will inspire the reader …”
Hey, I’m just one person but I’ve been inspired. For one thing, I’m going to start using Grecian Formula in the hope that a sexy Hittite priestess will gush all over me. I know it is a long shot. I do not even know where the Hittite part of town is. I’m looking at a map right now. Let’s see, there is Chinatown, Little Italy, Little India, but no friggin’ Little Hittitetown. Where does a nice non-orgy going boy meet a hot Hittite girl these days. I’m not picky. She doesn’t even have to be a priestess.
I’ve also been inspired to study religion, a topic I didn’t take seriously until six months ago. I’m not about to convert to Judaism (I see myself more as a neo-Platonist: spirituality for the sophisticated set) but through my study of Christianity and Judaism, I have come to a sincere appreciation of the moral profundity and intellectual depth of these two great traditions — the received wisdom of thousands of years of learning by trial and error, and rational and mystical thought. Western Civilisation turns its back on this moral and intellectual heritage at its peril.
Book Review
XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without a Shul
Luke Ford (2004)
Published by iUniverse Inc.: New York, Lincoln, Shanghai.
Luke Ford’s memoir of his time as a p___ journalist begins with an attack upon our moral leader by a troglodyte named Mike Albo. Luke’s head is smashed “repeatedly” against a light pole causing severe brain damage. Thank goodness Luke survived, otherwise there would be no autobiography for his fans and followers to study and savour. At least that’s what I thought before I actually started reading XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without a Shul. After plowing through all 67,000+ words (consisting mostly of cut and pasted emails, transcribed phone conversations and IM sessions with various p___ographers, hussies, and Orthodox rabbis) my view is decidedly less positive. But first a little background.
I would be lying if I said that I had no knowledge of Luke’s “old” life before I started my fan blog late last year. My earliest memory of Luke Ford was an appearance in 2001 with sexologist Bob Berkowitz on eYada.com, a defunct Internet radio station. Luke, speaking in the soft voice of a little boy caught in the act of doing something very naughty, was in full self-flagellation mode over his dual existence as a p___ reporter/critic and deeply religious Orthodox Jew. Although Luke’s version of this conversation differs from mine (I don’t recall Berkowitz being nearly as judgmental as Luke suggests in his memoir), his appearance left an impression on me. I recall checking out LF.com, but not being particularly interested in the inside workings of the p___ industry, I soon drifted away and almost completely forgot about Luke Ford.
A couple of years ago I became interested in the writings of James C. Bennett, a UPI columnist and theorist of the Anglosphere. Looking around UPI’s website, I found another columnist, Catherine Seipp, who wrote mostly about cultural matters from a centre-right perspective. There aren’t many conservative female commentators and I was intrigued. When UPI stopped offering its content online for free, I searched Cathy Seipp’s name to see if there was another way to read her weekly column. I discovered that she had a blog and through Cathy’s World I was reacquainted, much to my surprise, with Luke Ford. I wondered, why would a highly-respected journalist like Cathy be carrying on with an enfant terrible like Luke?
Unfortunately there is no answer to this question in Luke’s new autobiography XXX-Communicated. (I assume that the explanation behind their tempestuous on-again, off-again romance lies in the power of love — or at least good [edited] — to overwhelm a woman’s common sense.) Instead the reader is treated to a steady stream of disjointed anecdotes about some of the most unappealing people on the planet. It makes for a rather depressing study of what human beings are capable of when freed from divinely-inspired moral guidance.
Luke defined the aim of his p___ research in high-minded terms: “I’ll penetrate the most religiously-challenged corner of modernity with my newly-acquired Jewish conscience and come out the other side with insights into the human condition.” This sounds reasonable. What is less reasonable is how Luke goes about doing this: by making and acting in his very own p___ video, titled, quite inappropriately, What Women Want.
[This section has been removed to protect the young, the innocent, and those with good taste.]
I’m no expert, of course, but one has to wonder about the sanity of a man who thinks that p___ consumers want to watch a video featuring the producer/director/actor prattling on about Dennis Prager’s (a conservative Jewish theologian) views on male-female relations. Talk about a mood killer. And indeed, the market for a Prager inspired p___ video failed to materialise, much to Luke’s surprise and disappointment: “[D]istributors return the movie by the case … I end up giving away copies to my friends at my Reform temple.”
In chapter 3 we are introduced to the depraved world of p___ journalism. It’s not a happy place. Luke feuds with his fellow writers, people he apparently finds compelling on some level, but most readers, I suspect, will find merely stupid and boring. There is one amusing anecdote. Mark Kernes, of the Adult Video News, is described as “old and ugly … he looks out at the world with beady, suspicious, pig-like eyes, squinting between jowels [sic] of fat.” Luke wasn’t very popular with his colleagues.
Even at this early point, Luke’s memoir is largely a cut and paste affair. Unable to shape his material into a coherent whole made up of persuasively argued parts, Luke relies instead on recycling passages from his personal diary. For example, as part of his “research” Luke visits fifty-something p___ queen Kitten Natividad:
Aware of Kitten’s voracious appetite for young men, I open the back of my 1982 one-ton Dodge van and dig under the mattress and pillows for a pack of condoms. I pull out two, put them in my pocket, and walk to her apartment.
[This part has been deleted in the interest of preventing all those who have shaken hands will Luke Ford over the past six years from developing a mania for hand-washing.]
Luke cuts quite a path through the p___ community, banging p___ stars while moralising about the evils of promiscuous sex. Not surprisingly, enemies are made all over the San Fernando Valley. Luke’s biggest foe is a man named Mike Albo of Hustler magazine’s “Erotic Video Guide”:
You are a total moron. You are an idiot. You are a loser. I’ve been hearing about all your Internet activities. You’re a f___ing goofball. You just better hope that we don’t meet up because it’s not going to be a pretty situation. Judging from the yarmulke you wear on your pointy little pinhead, you must be a religious man. If I were you, I would pray that you don’t run into me.
[…]
You f___ing f__got, I just want to let you know that I’m going to kill you. You’re a real d___head. I don’t know how you think that there’s going to be no consequences for the s___ that you do. But there is, big time. And I’m going to love being one of the people that delivers it to you, pal.
Luke’s research not only angers the p___ community, it also causes his religious friends to shake their heads in disappointment and disbelief. Even Dennis Prager, Luke’s Jewish father figure, abandons him:
Since I have allegedly played such a positive role in your life, I would assume good works would flow –especially toward me — from you. Apparently my influence has been nil except in the most superficial sense. I truly am curious — does it bother you how you have alienated me?
But Luke carries on undeterred, convinced that by exposing the p___ industry’s negligence over AIDS he is saving lives.
Page after page follows of Luke’s relentless anti-p___ muckraking and the animosity that results. It’s depressing fare, but the occasional amusing story breaks the gloom. For instance, one day at the drug store:
A middle-aged woman approaches me. “I’m getting a special feeling about you,” she says and hands me her card. She’s a psychic. “You should come see me soon. I’ll give you a special rate.”
Coupon-clipper Luke isn’t one to pass up a bargain:
I have my tarot cards read ($30) and they seem to unveil my life. Moved, I pour out my problems.
A believer, I now visit the gypsy regularly. On her instructions, I buy candles from her for $100 each and exotic spices ($200) that I mix with water and pour over myself in the shower before leaving for synagogue Sabbath morning.
I buy crystals ($150) from her that I grasp in my hand every day when I dream about what I want. I buy a charm ($100) to put in my pillow.
[…]
After spending $1200, receiving no further improvements in my lot, I give up on the psychic.
What a shame. At least Luke, unlike all the psychic’s other customers, got the “special rate.”
Mostly though the book chronicles Luke’s immersion in the world of p___ and his rapid moral, physical, and psychological decline. As a sign of his deterioration, Chaim Amalek, one of Luke’s many “personalities,” appears. As the book becomes more introspective it also becomes more interesting (and creepy).
Near the end of his memoir, Luke visits Israel in an attempt to find himself. Just as he begins to experience a measure of healing and happiness the book abruptly stops. The reader is left with more questions than answers.
I hope I’m not giving the impression that XXX-Communicated is more coherent than it really is. In truth, it’s a bit of a mess. Although the memoir develops mostly along chronological lines, every so often Luke throws in a thematic chapter. For example, chapter seven is purportedly about race. But Luke doesn’t do essays. And it shows. The chapter is a hodgepodge of personal reflections (on his sexual conquests of elderly black women), intemperate observations about race and p___ography, and relentless questioning of black male actors about their [edited], a topic about which Luke is oddly fascinated. For all his scholarly pretensions, Luke obviously hasn’t spent nearly as much time in the library as he has out in the field. The seminal work on this subject is the late Calvin Hernton’s 1965 book Sex and Racism in America, which is still strikingly relevant today. But Luke isn’t interested. In fact, he quickly loses interest in the topic altogether and instead offers off-topic profiles of white performers, including “good friend” Kendra Jade.
We learn an awful lot about p___ journalists like Mike Albo in Luke’s memoir, so much so it reads in parts like the unauthorised Mike Albo story, but nothing about the people who are important in Luke’s life today, most especially Cathy Seipp, another one of Luke’s “good friends.” How did Luke meet Cathy? What was her initial impression of him? Was it love at first sight? How many dates did it take before she got lucky [edited — I really went too far here. What was I thinking? I’m almost as naughty as Luke.] Perhaps this more recent phase of Luke Ford’s life will be explored in volume two of XXX-Communicated: When Luke Met Cathy.
Overall Grade: B+
Strengthens: Amusing in places; some psychological insight into what makes Horrid Boy tick
Weaknesses: Choppy writing; poor organisation; general incoherence; bad language; adult (18+ years) themes
July 7, 2004:
Book Review
The Producers: Profiles in Frustration
Luke Ford (2004)
iUniverse, Inc.: New York Lincoln Shanghai
Do you ever wonder why Hollywood is so weird? Producer Mark Frost provides an answer in Luke Ford’s new book:
A lot of the people in this business are godless and corrupt. That’s without dispute … Creativity often creates unbalanced people. When you take an unstable personality and add fame and wealth and freedom of movement, you’re going to get amorality … It’s what Martin Amis called, “the moronic inferno side of show business.”
I had mixed feelings about The Producers: Profiles in Frustration. I didn’t think that reading 68 interviews with Hollywood producers would interest me, but I did want to find out how Luke Ford, a genuinely talented interviewer, would handle some of the biggest names in show business.
I don’t know how Luke got these people to talk to him. His charm must work wonders on Hollywood secretaries. Of course, he has had all sorts of practice asking women out and being turned down. Luke knows all about dealing with rejection and getting around an initial “No!” He has been rejected by nineteen year old community college girls all over Southern California for years. At least a mature Hollywood secretary isn’t going to scream: “Get away from me you pudgy middle-age pervert you, or I’ll call the police!”
After reading The Producers, I discovered that Hollywood production is actually a very interesting topic; in fact, I was disappointed when the book came to a close. Yet I still have mixed feelings. Not with the subject matter, but with some of the odd decisions Luke made when putting his book together.
The Producers begins with a series of amusing quotations. The late Edgar Scherick (ABC’s Wide World of Sports) told Luke: “I don’t think your book is going to be too interesting based on these questions you’re asking.” Scherick was wrong. But Al Burton, producer of numerous hit shows, including Diff’rent Strokes and Facts of Life, was right when he said: “I still can’t figure out what the point of your book will be.” After reading all 226,366 words, I’m not sure either.
Perhaps the subtitle is a clue. “Profiles in Frustration” suggests that the book is about the problems Hollywood producers experience when trying to turn a writer’s idea into a finished film or television programme. Unfortunately, Luke provides no help in his introductory essay, because he didn’t write one. Instead all he tells us, in a very short preface, is that he interviewed more than 100 producers. Sixty-eight of these interviews are included, while “[t]he stuff I could not fit in this book is on my website.” The reader has no idea why some interviews made the cut and others did not. Did the rejected interviews not fit with the book’s unifying theme, assuming that there is one? Only Luke knows and he isn’t telling.
Perhaps the first chapter will help. Luke begins his book with a 1996 interview with Harry Bernsen (b. 1925), father of actors Corbin and Collin Bernsen. This very brief biographical sketch is all we know about Mr Bernsen before the actual interview starts. In fact, Luke fails to provide an introductory paragraph to any of the chapters in the book. He just starts interviewing. More knowledgeable people than I may be familiar with many of the names. And, to be fair, for the most part Luke’s questions reveal who these people are soon enough. But it still would’ve been helpful if a short introduction was provided, telling us about the interviewee and relating his major accomplishments in Hollywood to the book’s central theme — again assuming …
In the first chapter we come across another strange decision. Luke asks his questions. Sometimes the interviewee answers briefly. Sometimes he gives long answers that run many paragraphs. Luke puts his words in quotation marks. He puts his interviewee’s words in quotation marks, too. So how does the reader know when Luke is speaking and his interviewee is speaking? Good question because it’s not always clear. For example, who do you think said the following? “Many of my Jewish male friends long for shiksas.” Luke Ford? That’s just a guess. But why should the reader have to guess? Why didn’t Luke put his questions and comments in boldface, or italics, or use a different font, or colour, or use block quotes, or something? Really, anything would’ve been appreciated.
I can understand the lack of an introductory essay. After all, Luke posts hundreds of pointless entries to his many blogs everyday, and writing a persuasively argued and elegantly written essay explaining the basic premise of The Producers would’ve been hard work. But putting his words in boldface wouldn’t have required any extra work at all. (Just to annoy us, there are two exceptions to this oversight. In chapters 22 and 58, Luke interviews two producers together. He kindly helps the reader know who is speaking by starting each conversational exchange with “Luke: … ” or “Marian: …” or “Anne: …” Nowhere else does he do this. It’s like he is taunting us or something.)
The reader’s frustration mounts upon completing chapter one. It still isn’t clear what The Producers is really about. Perhaps the “frustration” in the subtitle refers to Luke’s beleaguered readers? Mr Bernsen certainly doesn’t seem particularly frustrated with his lot. Horny? Yes. Frustrated? No. He tells Luke:
I’m 71 years old. I work out three days a week with a trainer. I lost 30 pounds in the last four months and I want to live another 30 years. I want to have babies with this woman [apparently referring to a woman he just spoke to in the café]. To be fair to her, I want to live another 30 years.
Bernsen goes on to give Luke some much appreciated advice on how to pick-up younger women:
Bernsen: I can say anything to anybody. How do you think I could talk to this girl like that? Could you have done that? Give her your card.
Luke: I could but I almost never would.
Bernsen: I do it because I just want to love her. I want to take her to bed.
Well, if Mr Bernsen is going to be having babies in his 70s with a woman he just met, I guess there’s still hope for Mr Ford. He has three decades to find his teenage bride. And if Harry Bernsen is any guide, Luke won’t even have to know the girl before they start making babies together. This optimistic message is the only reason I can think of for why Luke would start his book with an interview with little known Harry Bernsen. What any of this has to do with the frustration of being a Hollywood producer is unclear. It’s not even clear if Harry Bernsen is really a Hollywood producer. (I checked IMBD.com and found out that he has four production credits. The latest being for the memorable “Mighty Moose and the Quarterback Kid” in 1976. You remember Mighty Moose don’t you?)
In chapter four Luke interviews Emmy award winning producer and part-time college instructor Alan Sacks. Wacky provocateur Luke Ford writes (note, by the way, how I’m using block quotes to set off my words from those of Luke and Alan Sacks. I care about you the reader. If only Luke was a considerate, sensitive soul like me):
Wearing my yarmulke, I drive to Los Angeles Valley Community College where I find Sacks in the “smartest classroom on campus.”
[…]
Sacks teleconference’s with Derrick deKerckhove’s class at the University of Toronto. Mentored by media theorist Marshall McLuhan, Dr. deKerckhove directs the McLuhan Program in Culture and Technology. The quality of the students in his class, many of them pursuing graduate degrees, is light years ahead of the students in Alan’s community college class. What the Los Angeles class lacks in intelligence, however, it makes up for in racial diversity.
I’m reading this thinking, “Oh god no, Luke, please don’t go there. I don’t think I can take 550 pages of your racial pot stirring.”
Then things take another bad turn:
My attention is not on the program but on a woman. When I walked in the door, I noticed this pale Russian secretary. She wore a tight black miniskirt and a tight top.
I am overloaded by sexual stimuli. In my neighborhood, most of the people I know dress modestly. Here the girls wear tight jeans and revealing tops. I want to address them in the style of Prime Minister Gladstone wandering the streets of 19th Century London, trying to rescue fallen women: “Hi, I’m your moral leader. I want to talk to you about modesty. Please get into my van.”
[…]
A black woman dressed as the devil walks in. She’s the college president.
Alan Sacks isn’t pleased with Luke’s write-up of their conversation. Sacks complains:
You describe my students as dim bulbs. You describe someone else as black. You describe me as short and Jewish. Those are not positive images that you’re laying out there.
Luke (weakly) defends himself: “Ethnicities and religion are of interest to me.”
After a slow start, the book rapidly picks up momentum. Luke continues to ask political and religious questions, but, thankfully, he keeps his off-putting racial and sexual thoughts to himself. (I don’t mind Luke’s attempts at humour on his blog, but different audiences require different writing styles, and such remarks don’t belong in what should be a collection of serious interviews intended for a much wider audience than the sort of losers who read lukeford.net.)
Usually Luke stays on topic and conducts thoughtful and interesting interviews. Most of the conversations do indeed revolve around the problems Hollywood producers have in doing their work: how things have changed over the past thirty years; the diminished importance of the network movie of the week; the role of foreign markets; domestic oligopoly and reduced competition: the difficult economics of the independent film; and the perennial problems of having to deal with moody actors, flighty directors, and risk adverse corporate executives.
Luke carefully researches his subjects before interviewing them. He asks open-ended questions and then sits back, listens, smiles, nods, and tapes. Never holding back to save an interviewee from potential embarrassment, he transcribes (and posts) virtually everything. Occasionally the interviews don’t go anywhere. For example, Luke takes one female executive to lunch. She finds out about his background in p___ journalism and decides that she doesn’t want anything to do with him. But generally, Luke gets a great deal out of his interview subjects. Most are shallow narcissists who love to talk about themselves. They are also, almost without exception, very determined and aggressive people. Their drive leads them to be very abusive toward their bosses, co-workers, family members, and nosy interviewers…
Ah leftists, you gotta love ’em. So sensitive. So caring. So compassionate. So much better than those horrible mean-spirited conservatives.
And who cares more than Barbra Streisand? No one! She cares so very much. And who represents Mr Barbra Streisand? None other than that caring leftist, old Mr “Pot Belly” himself: “James Brolin has been my client for 24 years and my friend. I executive produced his TV series ‘Pensacola: Wings of Gold’ (1997-2000).” A wonderful television spectacle, I’m sure.
One can learn a lot about leftist hypocrisy reading The Producers. Leftists are so proud of themselves (and their moral superiority) that they want to shout their politics from the mountain top — and into Luke Ford’s trusty microphone. For example, Luke interviews Richard Dreyfuss’ producing partner Judith James. Ms James, who tells us that she’s “left of left politically,” has spent ten years trying to produce a documentary about Winnie Mandela. Oh sure there was that whole child murder thing, but leftists are very good at turning a blind eye to violence when it’s committed by their fellow travellers:
I’m a much greater supporter of hers than 92 percent of the people in the United States. I defy any person in this world to stand up to what she stood up to and not go crazy. She went nuts and she has not come back from the other side completely but she’s a great woman … [S]he has a great story and people should hear about it. There’s a little imp in me that says, “You don’t want to hear it? Fuck you, I’m going to tell it to you anyway.”
What a shame that Judith’s loving profile of Winnie has yet to be made. But hey, there are always other caring leftists for Hollywood filmmakers to beautify. How about Robert Mugabe? Yasser Arafat? Or Saddam Hussein? Wonderful socialists all. Hollywood leftists will have to hurry up on their Saddam hagiography, as he is not long for this world — thanks to evil President Bushitler. Many a Hollywood tear will be shed when Saddam is hanged. He cared so much for the less fortunate. Did you know that in pre-invasion days, Iraqis lived in a wonderland of kite-flying peace and tranquility? That’s what Hollywood’s favourite documentary filmmaker Michael Moore thinks. And from where does the world’s true evil originate? America, of course. Moore explains: “this country of mine … is known for bringing sadness and misery to places around the globe.” There are other sources of evil, too: “The oil companies, Israel, Halliburton.”
It’s a shame that Michael Moore didn’t get the full Luke Ford treatment in The Producers. Luke did, however, talk to Lewis Chesler (HBO’s “The Hitchhiker”):
Luke: What is the filmmaker’s moral responsibility to society?
Chesler: To subvert. Artists are not supposed to be good citizens. It’s not their work. They must challenge the system, not reinforce it. American studio films reinforce preconceived notions of behavior.
Luke: Have you ever read a script and thought, “This is too immoral for me to make.”
Chesler: No.
Chesler continues:
I have always felt there’s a relationship between sexual repression and the violence that is so endemic to American culture. One part of American’s fascination with horror and violence is that horror and violence is basically sexual projection and sexual repression. If there was a greater genuine sexual permissiveness, we would be less violent.
A Hollywood leftist lecturing us on how to make America a less violent place (through sexual promiscuity, no less). And you thought Luke Ford was nuts.
Luke certainly was nutty for not ending his book with a concluding chapter telling us what he learned, if anything, from interviewing these mostly leftist, and mostly moronic, Hollywood producers. And yet I enjoyed the book a great deal. It helps explain why the last good movie from Hollywood was 1959’s Pillow Talk, a romantic comedy starring Doris Day and Rock Hudson. It’s been all downhill since.
Overall Grade: A-
Strengths: Luke asks his questions. Lets his subjects speak and mostly gets out of the way. Some of them, thanks to their stupidity and vanity, proceed to hang themselves. It’s quite a spectacle. But most talk thoughtfully about the nitty gritty of producing films and TV shows in today’s Hollywood.
Weaknesses: Luke occasionally interjects himself unnecessarily into an interview, telling us about his fantasy sex life (as if we care); there is no clear theme; no introductory essay; no concluding essay; no typeface changes to help the reader determine who is speaking in long interviews; frequent bad language; lots of sexual references; occasional threats of bodily harm to Luke Ford’s person (no actual violence, though, thank goodness).
How To Buy: You can purchase The Producers: Profiles in Frustration in three different formats here, here, and here. You’ll be frustrated in places, but ultimately you won’t be disappointed.
July 8, 2004:
Luke Ford Shuts Down “Bitchy” Chatroom
From London’s Evening Standard newspaper:
Luke Ford has shut down his website comments section because fans have been slagging him off.
The superstar blogger said he was upset to see the forum “packed full of negative comment”.
Some posters had accused him of looking old and overweight and of not doing enough to promote his new books XXX-Communicated and The Producers.
Others had complained about the quality of his recent blogging.
In a message posted on the website, Ford said: “Hi everybody, this is Luke.
“I’m afraid that, having visited the forums on a regular basis over the past few months, simply to see how you guys thought the blogging/interviews/promotion were going, I have decided to close them down.
“As many of you will know, much of my reasoning for the future is to stay away from the negativity of the media, I think that it is bad for me and for blogging in general, so I find it really sad to see the forums so packed full of negative comment, and that so many genuinely positive fans find themselves defending me (or themselves) constantly against attack. How pointless.
“There are plenty of places to read people slagging each other off, but I wasn’t trying to create one in opening the forum. Those of you that want to carry on the media’s work will have to do it somewhere else I suppose.”
He added: “I feel bad for those of you who have always been supportive, but I’m afraid I want nothing to do with the bitching that has evolved between some members, (many members), and perhaps unofficial sites will be a calmer affair.”
Ford signed off: “Sorry guys, but that’s the way it goes … Peace and Love … or nothing at all.”
One disappointed fan branded the star’s decision “ludicrous”.
“It’s a fans’ forum, it’s freedom of speech and I don’t think it’s down to Luke to take his ball home and say ‘I’m not playing any more’,” the fan wrote.
“The fact of the matter is that people have opinions and they are entitled to them, that’s what a forum is for.
“This just generates more negative press for Luke and I have to say its a bad move.”
The majority of posts were supportive of the star and begged him to reconsider.
July 9, 2004:
h2>Luke Ford In Negative Chatroom Scandal!
From the British computer news site The Register:
Blaming the media and the end of all that is good, Luke Ford decided this week to shut down the comments section of his web site. Nasty comments about Ford looking tubby, old and tired also played a role in the decision, but Ford stressed that it was the media and the end of all that is good that were mostly to blame for the decision.
[…]
But what are we going to do without your web site? Where else can we share in our love of banal blog entries?
“Things will stay the same for the next two weeks, so that those of you who have made friendships can decide which other sites to meet at, and then the rooms will close. I feel bad for those of you who have always been supportive, but I’m afraid I want nothing to do with the bitching that has evolved between some members, (many members), and perhaps unofficial sites will be a calmer affair.”
Is it really that bad, Luke?
“Sorry guys, but that’s the way it goes … Peace and Love … or nothing at all.”
How did Ford’s immense fan base react to the news?
High Times writes, “i dont know what exactly bitching there was but we have moderators to watch the situation! REALIZE THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF US QUITE NORMAL FANS AND SOME 5 OR 6 OR HOW MUCH OF THEM IDIOTS MAKE LUKE BELIEVE WE ALL ARE SO NEGATIVE!!!!!!!!!!! WE ARE THE SAME FANS THAT WE WERE BEFORE!!!!!”
Yeah, cull the negative idiots.
But, that must be better than previous put-downs like this from Braiz_DPR.
“Message for Luke Ford
Hey man, how are you? I’m a 21 years old, simple, miserable, unknown gay guy that lives down way here in Brazil (South America) and only now I’m getting to know your writing … It started when I borrowed a p___ DVD from a friend (“What Women Want”) and saw the video and the interview. I found it amazing … and it’s just the begining for sure.
You are the sexiest man in the world … I just love to read your blogging … I wish you could blog to me right into my ears. I would shiver!!! And above all, you are soooo sexy!!! I would do anything to make love to you!!! You’re soooo HOT! I’m sorry for beeing so horny here …”
Easy, Luke.
So while Ford is called “fat, tired and old” in some places, there is not a lot of negativity. Sadly, we checked. There really isn’t much negativity at all. The chat forums are mostly loaded with poems and sex proposals for Ford.
But, as Ford says, it’s peace and love or nothing at all.
July 12, 2004:
Sucker
Luke Ford has asked me to comment on his recent dispute with the editor of Jewsweek magazine. I don’t know if he wants me to do so privately via email, but since I exist in a constant state of anguish over my lack of fan blog content, I think I’ll go ahead and write about it here.
I should point out that I don’t actually know Luke Ford. I’ve never met him. I’ve never spoken to him. In fact, I still hold out the possibility that he is merely a figment of Cecile DuBois’ precocious imagination. But for the sake of argument, let’s assume that he is in fact a living, breathing human being. Also, I know next to nothing about the so-called “craft” of journalism. Until a couple of days ago, I didn’t even know that interview subjects are sometimes given an opportunity to read a transcript of their conversations and suggest corrections or changes before publication. Lacking both intimate and expert knowledge, I’ll have to rely upon old fashion common sense to inform my thoughts on the affair.
Luke is apparently working on a new book about Jewish journalism. It will consist of, or be based upon, a series of interviews he is conducting with leaders in the field. One such individual is Benyamin Cohen, editor of Jewsweek magazine.
Luke interviewed Mr Cohen last Friday. On Sunday, after looking over a transcript of their conversation, Mr Cohen initiated a series of increasingly testy emails over how much the interview should be revised before publication.
Luke agreed to most of the suggested changes, but he finally drew the line over changing the word “sucks” to “stinks” in one of Mr Cohen’s answers. Mr Cohen responded: “Luke, I don’t think that’s appropriate. I’m asking you again to make that change. If you do not, I will have to ask you to delete my interview completely.”
When Luke refused, somewhat theatrically, Mr Cohen replied, even more theatrically: “If the wording doesn’t change, I will not be able to help you any further with any project you may be working on and I will dissuade my colleagues from helping either.” Mr Cohen then sent the following email to his fellow Jewish journalists urging them not to assist Luke in his research.
To all editors,
If you have not already, you will probably be contacted soon by a guy named Luke Ford, a writer from Los Angeles. He is currently writing a book about Jewish journalism and is asking for interviews with several AJPA members.
Like some of you, I agreed to be interviewed by him. In a transcript he showed me of our conversation, he ended up taking my words out of context and later started acting very discourteous and unprofessional.
Besides this Jewish journalism project, he’s been involved in some shady projects in the past (some pornographic, some evenagelical, etc.) I would highly reccomend to anyone who has yet to speak with him to NOT DO SO. You may come, like I have, to regret it later.
All the best,
Benyamin Cohen
In this email, Mr Cohen reveals himself to be a spoiled child who is not above dissembling to advance an argument. The claim that Luke took Mr Cohen’s “words out of context” in the transcript of their interview is nonsense. You can read the conversation here. Mr Cohen manages to make a fool out of himself without any nefarious assistance from Luke Ford.
Not knowing when to shut up, Mr Cohen proceeds to show himself to be not simply a fool but a bigot by claiming that Luke’s childhood Evangelical Christianity was a “shady project,” and he should be shunned.
I don’t believe in shunning people, even silly people like Mr Cohen. I believe that they need help. I have decided to kindly assist Mr Cohen by revising his answers to Luke Ford’s questions to save him from further embarrassment when Luke’s book is published.
In response to Luke’s first question about Jewsweek, Mr Cohen stated: “My philosophy on Jewish journalism is that most Jewish journalism sucks … My goal is to get people jazzed about Judaism. I feel that putting Madonna in every issue and doing irreverent things like that is a way to get people interested in Judaism.”
Madonna? In every issue? And he is embarrassed about the word “sucks”? If Mr Cohen is really serious about revising his comments for the sake of accuracy then I suggest the following change: “My philosophy on Jewish journalism sucks because I think it will get people jazzed about Judaism if I put Madonna in every issue of my magazine. What the fuck am I thinking?”
Mr Cohen continues: “The biggest obstacle we face, obviously, is a financial one. We’re working on a shoestring budget with few resources to pay writers.”
Revision in the interest of truthfulness is required here. This sentence should be amended to read: “The biggest obstacle we face, obviously, is my stupidity. I think that Madonna, of all people, should appear in every issue of Jewsweek. We are thus having financial difficulties. We’re working on a shoestring budget. But to be totally honest with you, I’m surprised that we have any budget at all.”
Luke asks (seriously?) why does Jewsweek lack mainstream sponsorship? Mr Cohen answers: “Not only that, they’re not even recognizing it as a viable resource. They scoff at it. They laugh at it.”
This comment needs to be changed to read: “Not only that, they’re not even recognizing it as a viable resource. They scoff at it. They laugh at it, and rightly so. After all, there is a war going on. Every day Muslim fanatics are murdering innocent Jews, Christians, Hindus, animists, atheists, etc., all the while I commission story after story on an old hag like Madonna.”
Luke asks why Jewish journalism is so dull. Mr Cohen answers: “You take a look at any popular magazine, it evolves over time. You have to stay on the edge or people are going to find you irrelevant. The younger generation of Jewish readers don’t care about what is going on in Israel or which philanthropist gave their money to which cause or most of the stuff these Jewish weeklies are reporting on.”
This statement is full of inaccuracies that must be corrected. Let me see if I can help: “You take a look at any popular magazine, it evolves over time. You have to stay on the edge or people are going to find you irrelevant. The younger generation of Jewish readers care very deeply about what is going on in Israel. And yet I’m such a vapid, celebrity-obsessed cretin that I don’t care at all about Israel. Instead I’m interested in Madonna. That is why she is in every issue of my magazine and why Jewsweek is so very dull and irrelevant.”
Luke wants to know if Jews read the Jewish press to learn about Israel. Mr Cohen dismisses this: “If they have a brain, they should be able to do that by reading a regular newspaper. That’s a lazy way to be Jewish … There’s so much Jewish news to report out there. If they’re only going to report the bomb in Israel this week with a sympathetic view towards the Jewish people, that’s horrible journalism and lazy Judaism.”
In the interest of truthfulness, this answer should be changed to read: “If I had a brain I would stop running articles about shallow celebrities and instead report on the bombing in Israel this week with a sympathetic view towards the Jewish people. To do otherwise is horrible journalism and lazy Judaism. But then again, I’m a horrible, lazy journalist, so what do you expect? Let’s face it: I suck stink.”
July 15, 2004:
I’m a Delicate Flower
I went to the local magazine stand to buy a copy of my new favourite periodical, only to be told that Jewsweek isn’t available in Canada. “But,” I exclaimed, “the August issue has a ten thousand word essay on Samuel David Luzzatto by Britney Spears. How could you not carry it? This is an outrage!”
I was told, unpleasantly, to “push off.” So on Friday I headed south of the border to find somewhere to get my hands on the world’s best Jewish magazine.
After driving thousands of kilometres, I finally found a place in Fargo, North Dakota, that had copies lying all over the store, seemingly unwanted. I picked up the latest issue, with Madonna on the cover, and made my way to the cashier. Out of the corner of my eye, I noticed the words “Luke,” “Ford,” and “Interview.” About time Commentary magazine got around to interviewing Luke Ford, I thought. But on closer inspection, Luke’s name was on the cover of a magazine called Penthouse Forum. Hmmm.
Of course I’m a gentleman, so I don’t read Penthouse Forum, Penthouse, or Big Butt Magazine. But I did remember a Seinfeld episode where Penthouse Forum was mentioned — something about amputees. Luke Ford is an amputee? I didn’t know that. Then I thought, perhaps Luke just likes having sex with amputees? Then I thought, isn’t it women who like having sex with amputees, not men — at least not heterosexual men? Then I thought, Luke Ford is capable of any and everything, so who knows? I decided to buy a copy — for research purposes only — to find out the truth.
I discreetly picked up an issue and made my way to the checkout stand. Unfortunately, there was some kind of hold up at the front of the line. A price check had been demanded by a dude buying Big Butt Magazine, which I don’t read. I don’t care how much they try to charge me for my copy of Penthouse Forum, I’m sure not going to make a scene. Buying porn is embarrassing enough without having it announced throughout the store. Some people have no shame. I have copious amounts of shame.
I’m already sweating bullets when who should sweep into the store? None other than my arch-nemesis Cecile DuBois. What the heck is she doing here? Cecile and I had a huge falling out a few weeks ago over the “adult” turn my blog had taken. Many an angry email was exchanged. I tried to blame Luke Ford, saying I was merely quoting from his memoir and that she had developed a totally wrong impression of me. “I’m a gentleman,” I explained. Cecile was having none of it. Now what is she going to think if she sees me buying Penthouse Forum?
I look down at my feet. I hunch over trying to look small. I comb my John Edwards-like bangs over my eyes.
I tried everything hoping Cecile wouldn’t recognise me. But of course she did. She approached and said, “Hi.” We made uncomfortable small talk. She was in the neighbourhood for Russian language camp. Needing a break from her studies, Cecile was looking to buy a copy of Doris Day Fan Weekly.
Cecile asked me what I was reading. “Jewsweek,” I said. Cecile said that she didn’t like Jewsweek. “Madonna’s in every issued. How lame is that?” she observed. I pointed to the essay on Samuel David Luzzatto, failing to mention that it was written by Britney Spears. That seemed to win her over a little bit.
Then Cecile asked me if I was feeling unwell as I looked flushed. Just at that moment my hands, perspiring profusely, lost grip of the Penthouse Forum I was hiding behind my back. It fell to the ground at her feet. Cecile looked down. She looked up at me. Then down at the magazine again. She looked up at me again, this time with tears in her eyes, and said accusingly, “I knew it.” I tried to explain that it wasn’t what she thought. I was merely doing research for my fan blog. But Cecile was already running out of the store crying, “Get away from me. I’m a delicate flower.”
I hate Luke Ford.
I was in a foul mood when I finally got home. The last thing I wanted to do was to read his interview in Penthouse Forum. Yet the more I thought about it, the more I came to understand that amputees need love, too — even if it is in the (chubby) form of Luke Ford. I opened the magazine to Luke’s interview only to be immediately distracted by a horrible full-paged picture of a man in a plaid shirt with a big grin on his face. Luke looks like a gay Scottish porn star who has just been informed that the lighting is ready and he will be needed to join his fifteen male co-stars on the set in a matter of moments to start filming his gangb*ng scene.
I begin reading the interview. I’m disappointed because it quickly becomes clear that it has nothing to do with amputees at all. It’s just another publicity effort by Luke to whip up interest in his autobiography XXX-Communicated: A rebel without a shul. Luke talks about his fascination with Playboy, Penthouse, and Hustler as a young man: “I didn’t actually have the nerve to initiate sexual congress with a real life woman, so my form of sexual expression was with pictures until I was twenty-one.”
“Sexual congress”? Hahahahahahahahaha!
Twenty-one? Hahahahahahahahaha! (Hey, maybe that had something to do with your use of the term “sexual congress”? Hahahahahahahahaha!)
I keep reading. My amusement quickly turns to horror: “In the years leading up to my conversion to Judaism, I became so religious that I actually went a year without masturbating. It’s incomprehensible to me now.”
Eeeeewwwww! Too much information.
You have to appreciate that these words are printed just millimetres away from that awful picture of a reclining Luke Ford with a huge grin on his face. The mind races. Mental pictures are formed. My stomach churns. Vomit spews — all over my copy of Jewsweek magazine. Now I have to drive to Fargo, North Dakota, and risk seeing my arch-nemesis Cecile DuBois again, to buy another copy.
I hate Luke Ford.
July 26, 2004:
Déjà Vu All Over Again
It took awhile but Luke Ford finally got off his rapidly expanding posterior to interview me for his upcoming book on Jewish journalism. Not that I’m Jewish or anything, but I do chronicle the life and times of one of America’s leading Jewish intellectuals. I suppose Luke took his sweet time because of his self-effacing modesty, but I was still a little bit annoyed that he ignored me for so long.
Once he was through with me, I decided that Luke is overrated as a deep and probing interviewer. I was left feeling unsatisfied, used, and very angry. The interview started slowly. The middle bit was boring. The ending dragged on and on. And then all hell broke loose. Here is the transcript and all the ugly details of the subsequent fight — and I mean that literally. (Get well soon Luke. I’m so sorry!)
My telephone rang at 3:37 pm Saturday, July 24, 2004:
Luke Ford Fan Blogger: Good afternoon.
Luke Ford: Hi, it’s Lickfardmate!
LFFB: Who? What?
LF: It’s me, Lickfardmate!
LFFB: Is this an obscene phone call? If so, missy, could you please call back at around midnight?
LF: No, it’s not an obscene call. And I’m not a missy. I’m a man — or at least somewhat mannish. You know me. It’s Lickfardmate!
LFFB: Oh, sorry about that, sir. I know you? Hold on, let me get my address book to see if I have a listing for a Mr Lickfardmate.
LF: Yes, it’s me, Lickfardmate!
LFFB: Relax, sir, I’m looking … Nope, I don’t know a Mr Lickfardmate. Are you trying to sell something?
LF: No! It’s Lickfard from the Internet, mate.
LFFB: Oh, you mean Luke Ford from the Internet?
LF: Yes! That’s what I said, mate.
LFFB: No you did not. Oh I know, it must be your horribly nasal Australian accent. You had me all confused.
LF: That must be it. I’m sorry, mate. My accent is just awful. Like the rest of my countrymen, I sound like a ridiculous cartoon character. I’m hoping that if my new books are successful and I make a lot of money, I’ll be able to hire a voice coach to teach me how to speak properly.
LFFB: Well, we all can’t be Englishmen. But I agree, that does sound like a wonderful idea. So how many books have you sold so far?
LF: I’ve sold one copy of XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without a Shul and two copies of The Producers: Profiles in Frustration. I’m very pleased, mate. By the end of the year the two books combined should out-sell my A History of X: 100 Years of Sex in Film.
LFFB: How many copies of A History of X have been sold since its release in 1999?
LF: Four, mate.
LFFB: Hmmm, interesting. You know, I’d really love to chat with you for hours and hours, but my sock draw is calling and I have some very important re-arranging to do. So, quickly, is there anything I can do for you? You’re not calling about that five star Amazon.com review of your memoir that you asked me for a few weeks ago are you? I’m sorry about that. It’s still on my list of things to do. I promise to go back and look at XXX-Communicated again as soon as my therapist gives me permission. After reading your autobiography in June, I had to seek professional treatment because of the part about your, er, “sexual congress” with Kitten Natividad. It caused me to have terrible nightmares that disturbed my sleep patterns. I hope you understand.
LF: Actually that’s Cathy Seipp’s fault, mate. I didn’t want to put any “adult” material in the book but she insisted. She was my editor after all, and I always do what she tells me to do. She’s probably more responsible for the book than I am.
LFFB: Yes, I could certainly see her influence in both style and content.
LF: Cathy asked for co-writing credit, you know. She was very insistent but I refused, mate.
LFFB: She must be so disappointed not to be more closely associated with your book.
LF: I’ll say, mate!
LFFB: Could you please do me a favour and stop saying “mate”? It’s really annoying.
LF: I’ll try, ma…, er, sir.
LFFB: That’s better.
LF: The reason I’m calling is to interview you for my new book on Jewish journalism.
LFFB: Thanks, I’m flattered. But it sure took you awhile. I thought you were going to interview everyone in the Hebrew, Yiddish, English, and Australian speaking worlds before getting around to me. But here’s the thing: I’m a private person. I don’t think I want my business all over the Internet. So I’m going to have to turn you down. I’m sure you understand.
LF: No, actually, I don’t. I write about and publish pretty much everything that happens to me. Like the time I had sex with Kitten Natividad and she asked me to sick my …
LFFB: Please stop.
LF: I’m sorry. I forgot about your night terrors.
LFFB: That’s okay. I’m slowly getting better.
LF: Oh, I have an idea. How about I interview you about me?
LFFB: That sounds just fabulous! [Sarcasm is completely lost on Luke Ford. — LFFB]
LF: So how come you started a Luke Ford fan blog last December?
LF: Boredom.
LF: I’m boring?
LFFB: No … I mean, sometimes, I guess. I was probably just bored at the time.
LF: What do you think about my Moral Leader blog on Blogger?
LFFB: It sucks.
LF: You don’t like it? I have permalinks now. That’s why I switched.
LFFB: No, the reason you switched was that you wanted to use Blogger’s “publish to multiple blogs” option to save time copying and pasting the exact same content to your various blogs.
LF: I can’t fool you, huh?
LFFB: No you can’t. And why do you have to post the same material to two or more blogs?
LF: Is that wrong?
LFFB: I wouldn’t say that it’s wrong, but I do think it would be better if you separated your blogs completely. Put the serious, intellectual material on Protocols, and the funny, personal stuff on LukeFord.net.
LF: So I should ditch the Your Moral Leader blog?
LFFB: Yes, the title is too in-your-face. Also I hate the Blogger ad at the top of the page. It screams “dilettante!” I thought you were a respected professional.
LF: I am! That’s why I need permalinks.
LFFB: You don’t really need permalinks. But if you insist, why not spend a little money, move to Typepad, and hire someone to create a unique template for you? I think this was Jackie D’s idea. You really shouldn’t be using a generic template from Blogger. The move to Blogger has severely damaged the Luke Ford “brand.”
LF: Yeah, I do tend to shoot myself in the foot from time to time. What about the content of my blog? Do you like it?
LFFB: Hmmm, I guess. But it’s awfully Jewy. Virtually every post these days seems to be about Jewish matters. All the more reason to separate your personal blogging from your Protocols blogging, I think.
LF: But I am Jewish. It’s personally very, very meaningful to me. Who knows where I would be without my faith?
LFFB: I don’t know, dude. I just think that you risk alienating your Gentile readers. You used to be funnier when you weren’t so Jewy.
LF: You’re not a very nice person are you?
LFFB: No, I guess not. Hey, I just noticed that I’ve got some lint in my bellybutton. I have to go and bathe. Bye.
LF: Hold on a moment! Are you still there?
LFFB: … Yes. What?
LF: Let’s talk about my new book The Producers, which can be purchased here, here, here, and here. You really liked it, huh?
LFFB: Actually it wasn’t that bad.
LF: Wow, that’s the nicest thing anyone has every said to me about my writing! I’m touched.
LFFB: Really?
LF: Yes, really! Most people ignore me.
LFFB: I wonder why?
LF: Jealousy.
LFFB: That must be it! The Producers was surprisingly interesting. I especially liked the interview with the producer of the television series “Mike Hammer.” The Edgar Scherick interview at the end was moving. The best part was the chapter about Bill Sargent, the man who wanted to get the Beatles back together in 1975. That was fascinating. Yet the book could have been even better.
LF: How so?
LFFB: Well, I think you are very good at conceptualising projects. Researching. Writing the first couple of drafts. And then the wheels kind of fall off. It’s the final stages of book writing that I think you struggle with.
LF: That’s Cathy Seipp’s fault. Blame her. She’s my editor. It’s her job to fix the problems at the back end of my writing projects.
LFFB: Right. But I think she missed a couple of things with The Producers. The book desperately needed an essay to tie everything together and guide the reader. And there were a couple of typos and factual errors she missed, too.
LF: Such as?
LFFB: You had Elvis Presley dying in 1997.
LF: Opps.
LFFB: Actually, I was surprised just how few of these little errors there were. The book was very professionally done.
LF: Thanks, you aren’t so nasty after all.
LFFB: No, I’m not.
LF: Can I call you again some time to talk about me some more?
LFFB. That sounds wonderful, except that I’m about to go out of town.
LF: How about when you get back?
LFFB: Umm, let’s see, I would really love to but I think my phone is failing.
LF: Buy a new phone.
LFFB: Yeah but there’s a phone shortage, I’m afraid.
LF: A phone shortage? I’ve never heard of such a thing.
LFFB: Well in Canada you have to buy your telephone from the government and there is something like a five year wait. With socialism there are always shortages. It’s really awful.
LF: Can I call you in 2009 to talk about me?
LFFB: The five year wait is a best case scenario. It could be five years. It could be fifteen years. It could be twenty-five years before I get a new phone. So how about you call me again in, say, the year 2029?
LF: Okay, thanks.
LFFB: You’re welcome. Goodbye.
LF: Goodbye, mate.
Sunday morning Luke sent me a transcript of our phone conversation. I asked for a few minor changes. Luke obliged. But when I asked him to change the word “sucks” to “stinks” in the question about his move to Blogger, he refused. I only asked in the interest of accuracy as I very seldom use bad language. I was having a bad day. My computer crashed. My car wouldn’t start. And my air conditioning broke.
It must be that time of the month for Luke as he threw a bizarre hissy fit over the matter. Here’s Luke’s account of the dispute:
I started to run into problems with my fan blogger before 8 a.m. Sunday, July 25. I asked him for contact info for his friend Rebecca Schoenkopf. He replied, “Why?”
I replied: “Because I want to ask her out on a date. Also I want to interview her for my book on Jewish journalism.”
He replied: “Yeah, but she’s a Roman Catholic.”
I replied: “Luke Ford fan blogger, I don’t tell you how to run my fan blog. Don’t tell me who I should or should not interview for my book. I get this all the time and I’m sick of it. If you don’t want to give me her email, why don’t you email her and ask if she’d be willing to talk to me. She could be a black lesbian Buddhist for all I care, so long as she has worked in journalism. Sheesh, why do I have to explain something so elementary.”
Luke Ford fan blogger replied: “Luke, relax, girly-man. I just wasn’t sure if you knew that she wasn’t Jewish. That’s all. Truth be told, in my opinion, she knows more about Jewish journalism than most Jews do. Her email address is commiegirl99@hotmail.com. Just tell her you interviewed me and I gave you her name.”
Luke Ford fan blogger sent me about a dozen more emails when I did not go along with every one of his requested changes to his transcript. I agreed to most of them but I wouldn’t change the word “sucks” to “stinks.”
I emailed the Luke Ford fan blogger that I preferred “sucks.” It was more pungent.
He replied: “I would prefer it the other way please.”
I replied: “Nope.”
He replied: “Huh?”
I replied: “I am not making the change you requested.”
He replied: “Luke, I don’t think that’s appropriate. I’m asking you again to make that change. If you do not, I will have to ask you to delete my interview completely.”
I replied: “You said the word ‘sucks.’ I prefer it to ‘stinks.’ That word and the interview stands, whether you like it or not. I am not your servant.”
He replied: “Before I agreed to the interview with you, I asked Cathy Seipp if she thought it was a good idea. She said it’s fine since Luke will let you read the transcript and change things if you want. I guess I was under that false impression. As you know, Saturday afternoon was not the best time for me to conduct an interview — my computer had crashed, my car wouldn’t start, and my air conditioning was broken. I rarely, if ever, use words like ‘suck’ (ask my friends, it’s not in my character). You caught me at an extremely perturbed time and I think now you’re taking advantage of it. If the wording doesn’t change, I will not be able to help you any further with any project you may be working on and I will dissuade my fellow Luke Ford fans from helping either.”
I replied: “I don’t think we’re really fighting over the word ‘sucks.’ Along with your courage and independence and vision and self-made thing comes this unpleasant bullying and control-freak quality.”
He replied: “Calling me a control freak is way out of line. You don’t know me and you’ve never met me. We’ve only spoke for 30 minutes. To pass such psychological judgments is irresponsible and rude on your part. Unfortunately, I don’t think we can reach an amicable conclusion about this. I will now be forced to tell others not to talk with you — including Rebecca later today. I am the moderator of the Luke Ford fans listserv and I will be sending out an email to all the editors later today to tell them of my unprofessional and discourteous experience with you.”
I replied: “Go for it.”
He replied: “FYI, I have told Rebecca not to speak with you. As well, I have sent out an email to all Luke Ford fans advising them not to talk with you.”
I replied: “That sucks. Oh, and you’re fat and have a pot belly.”
I was willing to move on realising that Luke is the temperamental artist-type, but his last comment really pissed me off. I know I have a slight weight problem, but to say that I have a pot belly was really over the line. Unfortunately, I lost my temper and really let Luke have it. Here is the transcript of my phone conversation Monday afternoon. I apologise for the bad language, it really sucks:
I want my whole thing down. I want nothing to do with you. I’m fat with a pot belly? Who the fuck do you think you are? I can make you not fucking breathe. Everyone else will be polite and send you a letter like Benyamin Cohen [Luke had an eerily similar dispute over the word “sucks” with the poor editor of Jewsweek magazine a few weeks ago, who, I’m sure, had no idea what hit him. — LFFB]. I’ll stop you from breathing. Do you understand me? You can put that up there and quote it. I’m just telling you something right now. I will crush you with fucking lawyers. And that will just be the fun part. That will be the part of your day that you fucking enjoy when you run out of fucking money. Now take it the fuck down. You phoned me under false pretenses. Take the whole fucking thing down. And you’ve got that shitty thing on Benjamin Cohen up there. What the fuck is the matter with you? Do you want to win friends here and get any kind of cooperation? I’ll put your name all over this fucking place. I’ll send out emails to everyone in this fucking town and nobody will take your fucking calls when I’m finished. I’m just telling you something. You’re fucking with the wrong guy here.
In retrospect I know that I over-reacted, especially with the use of the f-word, which I seldom use in everyday life owing to the fact that I really do try to be a gentleman at all times. I was willing to forgive Luke but I just didn’t want anything to do with him for a few days. Unfortunately, he decided to visit the Luke Ford Fan Blog building Tuesday afternoon. Here is what Luke had to say about our confrontation, which again mirrored a very similar fight that Luke had years before with Hustler’s Mike Albo, as related in XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without a Shul, which you can purchase here, here, here, and here. It’s weird how history keeps repeating itself:
Tuesday afternoon, I walk from my 10 x 20 foot hovel to the magnificent 10-story headquarters of Luke Ford Fan Blog Publications. I slump down on a brick bench beside the entrance and wait for Luke Ford Fan Blog features editor Rebecca Schoenkopf.
Suddenly a door flies open and the Luke Ford fan blogger — fat, bald, heroin-addicted — charges out. [Again with the “fat” comment! Luke just won’t give it a rest. And he wonders why I keep flipping out. Also I’m not bald (my hair is merely thinning). And I don’t do heroin (I smoke crack). — LFFB]
“Get the fuck off the property!” he screams. [Once again sorry about my use of the f-word. Normally I don’t speak this way. Honest. — LFFB]
“I’m just here to meet Rebecca for lunch,” I explain.
He’s not interested. He grabs my jacket, shakes me, and knocks me down.
From the ground, I see a burly Luke Ford Fan Blog Publications security guard looking on.
I pick myself up and scurry over to the sidewalk, hoping the Luke Ford fan blogger will leave me alone once I’m on public property. He doesn’t. I back down the street as Rebecca walks out of the building.
“Come here, you pussy!” yells the Luke Ford fan blogger, his round face contorted with rage. I can’t help smiling.
People stop to watch. A man in a car cheers for a fight, but I have no stomach for it. My last fight was in sixth grade. I lost.
Although the Luke Ford fan blogger is a tubby three-pack-a-day smoker, his homicidal anger scares me. [Really it’s all an act. I’m not in the least bit scary. And stop calling me fat, damnit! — LFFB]
He picks up a metal chain and swings it above his head. “You wanna die or do you want to stop writing about me?”
I say yes, unable to stop grinning.
“What are you smiling about? You think this is funny? Do I amuse you?”
He lunges for my neck and smashes my head repeatedly into a light pole. My life flashes before my eyes.
I feel awful about smashing Luke’s head repeatedly into a light pole. Yes, he did call me fat, amongst other things, but it was still wrong of me to react in the way I did. Fortunately, Luke won’t be pressing criminal charges. Better still, his head injuries won’t effect his blogging according to the neurosurgeon taking care of Mr Ford. I explicitly asked the doctor if Luke’s injuries will somehow diminish his blogging in the future. The doctor replied that perhaps in terms of quantity Luke may be slowed for a few days, but after the bandages have been removed there is no reason to think that the quality of Luke’s blogging will change. As the doctor put it: “You could stick Luke’s head under a bus and run over it countless times and this still wouldn’t lower the quality of Luke’s writing.” That’s a compliment, I think.
Update: Here is a picture of me after hearing that Luke is going to be okay. I told you I wasn’t fat.
August 25, 2004:
Do You Want To Marry Luke Ford?
Of course you do!
Oh, I suppose if you brainstormed for a hundred thousand million billion zillion years you might be able to come up with one lame reason not to marry Luke. But you don’t have the time. Your biological clock is ticking, and Luke isn’t getting any younger (or thinner) either.
Where to begin on your quest to become Mrs Luke Ford?
These days a (good) man is hard to find, and a (very good) man, like Luke Ford, is especially rare. To snare such a man will take lots of initiative, dedication, and saleswomanship. Let’s face facts, ladies. When it comes to romance, it’s a buyer’s market and you’re selling.
Preparation is the key. This means reading everything you can find on Luke Ford. I suggest beginning your research with the Luke Ford Seeks a Wife blog (recently renamed, for some indeterminate reason, “I’m Better At Getting Under Your Skin Than Scabies.”) Check out the July 18th post to see if you meet Mr Ford’s perfectly sensible requirements for a mate. For example, do you have a hip-to-waist ratio of 3:2? Do you have long, silky hair? Long arms and legs? A symmetrical face?
Yes? Good. Next, start building your personal Luke Ford library. Here is a short list of books that should be part of your collection:
1) XXX-Communicated: A rebel without a shul. This is Luke’s life story. The future Mrs Luke Ford should read this work forwards, backwards, sideways, everywhichway until it is committed to memory.
You may be saying, “But isn’t XXX-Communicated self-indulgent gibberish? Isn’t it full of poorly developed stories, cut and pasted IM conversations, and perverse sexual encounters? Surely it can’t be worth $30 (plus shipping and handling)?”
Ah, your frugality will serve you well in your new life as Mrs Luke Ford. And yes all these criticisms are well-founded. But read, and study, XXX-Communicated you must. Fortunately, Powell’s has a sale on XXX-Communicated in PDF format for just $4.80. Luke’s other new book The Producers is also just $4.80. Just think, you can purchase both XXX Communicated and The Producers for less than ten dollars. Wow, what a deal!
2) Reading Luke’s memoir will lead you to discover that Luke has a, um, “problem.” A mental problem, of sorts. Don’t worry. Virtually everyone has emotional baggage of some kind or other. Are you perfect? Didn’t think so.
To be more precise, Luke suffers from NPD (narcissistic personality disorder). You can read about his condition in a blog entry from Barefoot Jewess, who, I gather, knows/knew Luke intimately. Ms Jewess offers her considered analysis of Luke “Net Psycho” Ford:
And so, enter, “BigBad”. A well known, even infamous poster, blogger, “journalist”, “writer”. I find it rather amazing that so many of us can string a bunch of words together and that somehow that gives us status as “writer” …
To this day, I do not understand why suddenly, I entered a world inhabited by whackos (unless living in LA had something to do with it). And let me tell you, there are moments when the moniker “whacko” says it all …
The central thing to understand about pathological narcissists is that they have a “slippery inner narrative” (not my insight). Which means that they can create personalities and behaviours disassociated from themselves, certainly ones wherein they can let their rage loose, just like Amalek [Ford]. Why? Because they are faithless. Which means that they are loyal to nothing and no one but their image …
They are not in touch with anything about themselves because in essence there is nobody home. Severely pathological narcissists are very much like Amalek. Moreover, they can be dangerous to the mental health and life of others.
Pathological narcissists are emotional vampires. You find yourself doing all the work, in fact, filling in the emotional and human gaps for them …
When you are no longer of use to them, they discard you.
Don’t end up bitter and angry, like Ms Jewess. Instead, look for a good book on how to have a successful relationship with a sad soul who suffers from NPD. I’m afraid I have limited knowledge in this area. I did briefly check out Amazon.com and found a couple of books that might be worthy additions to your personal library:
Why Is It Always About You? The Seven Deadly Sins of Narcissism by Sandy Hotchkiss
Emotional Vampires: Dealing With People Who Drain You Dry by Albert J. Bernstein
3) Okay, let’s jump ahead. The big day has come and gone. Now you’re married. You’ve moved into the hovel. Woo hoo!
What next? Being a good wife. But what does this mean exactly? It means being respectful toward your man. The fabulous Laura Doyle explains all in her wonderful book The Surrendered Wife:
Respect the man you married by listening to him without criticizing him, insulting him, laughing at him or making fun of him. Even if you disagree with him, do not dismiss his ideas …
Respect means that when he takes the wrong freeway exit you don’t correct him by telling him where to turn. It means that if he keeps going in the wrong direction you will go past the state line and still not correct what he’s doing. In fact, no matter what your husband does, you will not try to teach, improve, or correct him …
Stop telling your husband what to do, what to wear, what to say and how to do things, even if you think you’re helping. As much as possible, mind your own business …
Your husband may make a pronouncement that sounds silly … the first step in respecting your husband’s thinking is to let him think out loud without criticizing, laughing at, dismissing, or insulting him.
Instead, say with as much kindness and sincerity as you can muster, “Whatever you think” when he is telling you his ideas. For instance, if he comes up with a nutty thought that he should change jobs, and this strikes terror in your heart, you say, “Whatever you think.” If he says he thinks the kids should learn how to ski, and this sounds dangerous to you, say, “Whatever you think.” If he says he thinks the two of you should go out to dinner, and you think you should save money and eat at home, say, “Whatever you think.”
What fabulously wonderful advice. I just have one quibble. Regardless of what your husband says, your response should be, “Whatever you think, dear.” Adding the “dear” on the end is more respectful, and I’m sure Luke will appreciate you for it. Remember, respect is the key to being Mrs Luke Ford, aka Surrendered Wife.
This is just a start. I’m sure that there are many other books that you will want to add to your library. For example, you may be interested in Home Comforts: The Art and Science of Keeping House, by Cheryl Mendelson, which teaches women how to run a home, or in this case, a hovel. In olden times, back in the ’50s, women didn’t need to read books about how to cook and clean for their menfolk. I’m referring to the 1350s, the good old days before women got all uppity and difficult. But there’s help at the bookstore. You just have to know where to look.
September 9, 2004:
Is Luke Ford a Genius? (Part 1)
When Luke Ford proudly announced a couple of months ago that he had an IQ of 185, I was somewhat taken aback. Okay, I was somewhat more than somewhat taken aback. It seemed an awfully high score for Mr Cut & Paste. Not that I thought Luke was lying. Of course not! I merely assumed that a gigantic mistake had been made somewhere. Perhaps one day at Seventh Day Adventist Sunday school, Luke’s class had been given an intelligence test, and as the teacher read out the results above all the din, racket, and mocking laughter, Luke misheard his score. 18.5 sounds a lot like 185, doesn’t it? Yes it does!
Nothing over the past few weeks caused me to question my theory: not Luke’s hyperactive blogging; not Luke’s memoir of his days as a p— journalist; and not Luke’s latest book, a meandering series of transcribed interviews with Hollywood producers. Well, nothing, that is, until the reviews for The Producers: Profiles in Frustration started to roll in.
First, a boy friend (not “boyfriend”), Roger Jacobs, slobbered all over Luke’s “massive exploration” on Amazon.com, coming up for air to say that one interview alone (Don Phillips) is worth the cover price. Jacobs’ suck-up ends: “The Producers: Profiles in Frustration is a piece of work that I would never thought an autodidact like Luke capable of, namely a book that is a must-read …”
I didn’t pay too much attention to Mr Jacobs’ review. Having been bombarded with emails from Luke demanding that I, too, write a five star review of The Producers for Amazon.com, I assumed that Mr Jacobs scribbled something quickly just to de-spam his inbox.
Now comes Jeffrey Wells. I have no idea who Mr Wells is, but his site looks very professional and he has a link on the Drudge Report. So I assume he must be pretty important. Imagine my surprise to read: “There’s a kind of low-key genius in Luke Ford’s The Producers: Profiles in Frustration …”
Oh my god, I thought, there’s another dude out there named Luke Ford who just wrote a book called The Producers: Profiles in Frustration! What are the odds of that?
Wells continues: “In a way you can almost feel The Producers: Profiles in Frustration taking flight inside you after you’ve finished reading it, like a bird.”
Wow, this other Luke Ford must be a wonderfully talented writer!
Wells: “Ford, an ace-level gossiper and story-teller (his website, www.lukeford.net …”
Hold on, how can there be two www.lukeford.nets?
Huh? What’s going on here?
The Luke Ford of Your Moral Leader, Luke Seeks a Wife, Protocols, A History of X, XXX-Communicated, and The Producers is a genius? That Luke Ford? A genius? Really?
To be continued …
Is Luke Ford a Genius? (Part 2)
This is part two of three blog posts that will form the basis of my new book, Luke Ford: Genius or Retard, which will be published later this year by iUniverse Press. Surprisingly strong sales of the e-book versions of XXX-Communicated and The Producers reveal a huge demand for writings by, and about, Luke Ford. iUniverse has asked me to help serve this market with an unauthorised biography, generously offering an advance of $300,000. I agreed. Who says that there is no money to be made from blogging. And unlike Jessica Cutler, I don’t have to take my clothes off! Not that I’m opposed to nudism; in fact, like Rebecca Schoenkopf, I’m an enthusiastic exhibitionist. It’s just that no-one wants me to strip to help promote my book. Odd that. Speaking of my favourite nudist, Rebecca has agreed to write the Foreword, wherein she will make the case that Luke Ford is a retard, in addition to his many other failings. The rest of the book will consist of my argument to the contrary.
Jeffrey Wells’ claim that Luke Ford is a “genius” (see below) may seem implausible to many. I have to admit, it initially struck me as completely, totally, absolutely, and utterly absurd. But after much thought, I have come to see things differently. Please let me explain.
Over the past few weeks, I have been reading a great deal of Noam Chomsky, the MIT linguist and radical activist. Chomsky has been described by the New York Times as “arguably the most important intellectual alive.” According to the Chicago Tribune, he is the most cited living author (eighth all-time, trailing Freud and just ahead of Hegel and Cicero).
Although Luke Ford is not (yet) on the top ten list, there are many striking parallels between Chomsky and Horrid Boy. Chomsky and Ford are both handsome, charismatic moral leaders. Both are prolific writers (Chomsky of political pamphlets; Ford of narcissistic blog entries). Both are Jews (Chomsky real and self-loathing; Ford pretend and self-loving [figuratively and literally]). And both have numerous celebrity followers (Chomsky: Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Bono; Ford: Raquel Devine, Heather Hornay, Fluffy Cumsalot).
But it’s the contrasts between the two that I will explore in part three of this series. These differences are profound. If I can show that Luke Ford is the superior thinker, and thus worthy of at least seventh place on the all-time list of intellectuals, can there be any doubt that Our Moral Leader is, in fact, a genius?
To be continued …
September 25, 2004:
Norman Geras Interviews One Of Luke Ford’s “Lady” Friends
Perhaps I’ve been overly influenced by Cathy Seipp’s fan blogger, because I half expected her to answer Norm Geras’ question “Who are your intellectual heroes?” with “Cathy Seipp!” I was relieved that she didn’t. Her list, although suspiciously short, is impressive enough. And yet someone is missing. Who could that be? Hmmm, let me think … Oooh I know, the seventh (at least) greatest intellectual of all-time: Luke Ford!
Miss Seipp’s appalling oversight disappointed and, frankly, hurt me (deeply). I’ve been putting off completing my “Is Luke Ford a Genius?” series of essays, and I suspect that this is the reason why Mr Ford was cruelly overlooked. I’ve searched the Internet and found, much to my surprise, that Chelseureka Paprika isn’t the only one who forgets to mention Our Moral Leader when these sort of lists are compiled. If only I’d kicked my ass last week and finished my argument that Mr Ford is a genius, I could have singlehandedly saved him from the public embarrassment and emotional anguish of being slighted by his supposed “best friend.”
Alas, I’ve been suffering my own emotional anguish these past few days. My $300,000 book deal with the once fabulous people at iUniverse Press has fallen through. Apparently there was a misunderstanding. I compared and contrasted Luke Ford with Noam Chomsky so often in my book proposal that the once fab people at iUniverse were left with the mistaken impression that I was planning to author … I mean write an unauthorised biography of Chomsky. When I explained that it was Luke Ford, not Noam Chomsky, who secretly directed a p___ video and was sixtysomething sexaholic Kitten Natividad’s toyboy, the once fab people at iUniverse inquired: “Who the f___ is Luke Ford?”
Me: “Only the most successful author … I mean writer at iUniverse Press!”
Once Fab: “Really?”
Me: “Yes, really! He’s the author … I mean writer of the ebook bestsellers XXX-Communicated and The Producers!”
Once Fab: “Huh?”
Me: “And the blogger extraordinaire behind Your Moral Leader, Luke Seeks a Wife, and Protocols!”
Once Fab: “Okay, we’ll look at his websites and get back to you.”
Me: “Cool!”
0.003 nanoseconds later, the once fab people at iUniverse Press called me and demanded their $300,000 back, which is something of a problem in light of the fact that I already spent it.
To celebrate my good fortune, I decided, using Luke Ford as my role model, to start hanging out with hookers, strippers, and elderly p___ stars. Big mistake. You see these women are very, um, materialistical, and it didn’t take them long to go through all my funds, what with all the diamonds, furs, and trips to Capri — not to mention booze and drugs — I was buying. Then, much to my surprise and disappointment, all my girlfriends left me! Bummer.
But I did find out why Luke Ford, despite being a best selling ebook author … I mean writer, is so poor. Considering the sort of “ladies” he socialises with, it’s a wonder that he isn’t in debtors prison. Further proof, I tell you, that Our Moral Leader is a genius!
October 17, 2004:
Luke Ford Made Me Cry
When one reviews a book, one should read said book before one critiques it, should one not?
Not necessarily. I don’t think I read a book cover-to-cover until I was 20 (or so). When I was a young, far from studious schoolboy and my English teacher assigned a book report, I would make up a novel in my head. This was much quicker than actually reading some stupid book. And it worked, too. Until, that is, I got caught and my teacher started questioning me all accusingly-like. Fortunately, I have a wonderful talent for being able to cry — with real tears — on command. So I pretended to cry.
Admittedly, I can be quite manipulative at times — okay, pretty much all the time. In fact, a couple of days ago, my mother said to me that I was the most dishonest person she’d ever met. She really said that. OMG! What a terrible thing to say to her own flesh and blood. I was so upset that I vowed then and there to stop being deceitful. I’ve made this promise before, but this time I meant it. From now on, I told myself, I will never tell another lie. So far so good.
Speaking of horrible people, I see Luke Ford has a new book. It’s like he’s got a freaking book factory down at the hovel. Every couple of week’s another tome comes off the Luke Ford conveyer belt. This one’s called Yesterday’s News Tomorrow: Inside American Jewish Journalism.
Obviously Luke has a system for writing books. Yesterday’s News Tomorrow is structured just like The Producers. It begins with “What They Said,” a series of quotations. Next, a couple of Luke’s “friends” contribute Foreword essays. Then comes the body of the work: a whole bunch of interviews, in this case with Jewish journalists (I think).
I don’t want to be mean but in accord with my new policy of being completely honest at all times, I would like to say something about the manner in which the book starts. Either Mr Ford thinks that he has so much credibility as a social commentator that he can afford a few jokes at his own expense, or he thinks that he has no credibility whatsoever and thus some nasty remarks can’t possibly do him any damage.
A reader not familiar with the Luke Ford œuvre may wonder what he got for his $35.95 (hardcover), $25.95 (softcover) or $6 (eBook) after reading comments like: “I don’t understand what you are doing here. Who’s your publisher?” (Rabbi Shmuley Boteach), or “Dear Mr. Ford: I do not wish to be included in your book. If there is anything negative about me or my family in your book you will hear from my attorney” (Rabbi Sheldon Zimmerman).
Such opening remarks don’t inspire a lot of confidence in Mr Ford’s stature as a player in the world of Jewish journalism. But they’re not nearly as damning as Robert Avrech and Matt Welch’s Forewords, which are brutal — totally, absolutely, heartbreakingly brutal. Poor Mr Ford, I thought. These are your friends and yet they write terrible things about you, such as:
Betrayal fascinates Luke Ford. It’s his life. Luke betrayed his father, a prominent Seventh Day Adventist minister, when Luke converted to Judaism. Luke betrayed his second “father” when he sacrificed his friendship with Dennis Prager to work on an unauthorised biography of his hero. Luke betrayed Judaism when he became lukeford.com, the preeminent journalist covering LA’s sordid, mob-infested p___ industry. Luke betrayed his Orthodox synagogue when he lied about his work and told the rabbi that he was a “freelance journalist who writes about crime for a Japanese magazine.”
OMG!
Then Matt Welch says:
I’ll never forget the first words Luke Ford ever spoke to me. “So Matt,” he said, shaking my hand. “What do you like to think about when you jack off?”
OMG!!
At this point I decided to put the book down and take a shower.
Upon picking up Yesterday’s News Tomorrow, I learned that, according to Matt Welch, Mr Ford is, allegedly, a serial liar, a failed actor, a p___ freak, a borderline racist …
OMG!!!
Again: these are Mr Ford’s friends. It’s all so sad. I couldn’t help myself. I started to cry.
Soon my tears of pain turned to tears of joy as I began reading all of Luke’s Jewish journalism interviews. Yep, every single one. I didn’t skip over any of them. Nope. Read ’em all. Unfortunately, I can’t remember what they were about so I won’t be able to summarise them here. But I do know that they are good, supergood. They are so moving that upon reading them — all of them — I felt like a bird had taken flight inside me (or something).
I’d love to chat about Luke’s new book some more. It’s good, supergood. All I can say is that it’s probably one of the best books ever! I’d put it right up there with the Happy Hooker by Xaviera Hollander (the first book I read cover-to-cover) and the Bible, which I haven’t read but I hear is good, supergood — just like Yesterday’s News Tomorrow.
Anyhoo, I have to run. I’m going to dinner with my mother. I think I’ll tell her about my new job: I’m a freelance journalist who writes about crime for a Japanese magazine. Honest.
October 10, 2004:
How About Some Moral Leadering?
When I decided to hitch my wagon to Luke Ford’s serial killer van, I did so in the expectation that soon I would be zooming toward fame, fortune, and enlightenment in Our Moral Leader’s slipstream.
Yet here I sit one year later and I swear we haven’t gone anywhere. No fame, no fortune, and no enlightenment. My once pretty John Edwardseque smile has long since turned into a pissy Dubyaesque scowl. Hey, you try sitting in a little wagon for a year and see how much you like it!
A couple of days ago I finally wandered over to the nearby newsstand in search of moral uplift. After carefully studying Playboy, Penthouse, and Big Black Butt magazines, I came across an inspiring article by P. David Hornik in the American Spectator on industrial animal husbandry and the ethical case for vegetarianism:
if we can get along (especially in light of modern nutritional science) just as well by eating tasty vegetarian dishes, what’s the justification for all that slaughter? Why not remove at least that much blood and violence from the world?
There is much biblical support for that outlook. In Eden before the Fall, Adam and Eve eat only the “herb bearing seed” and the “fruit of a tree yielding seed”; the animals have already been created, but there is no mention of killing and consuming them. We first hear about that only in regard to Abel, the keeper of sheep, when humanity is already in a fallen state. Indeed, after Eden the Bible allows meat-eating but takes it very seriously, giving the Hebrews the stringent regulations that are now known as the kosher laws …
Is this not the sort of writing that one should expect from the Luke Ford Family of Blogs™? Yes it is! And yet what we get are countless stories about the sexual transgressions of rabbis. Why? Voyeurism can’t be the answer. Obviously not! Our Moral Leader isn’t that kind of dude. I suppose his posts are intended as moral uplift by way of demonstration of what not to do. Yet the probability that I will convert to Judaism, become a rabbi, and start having sex with 12 year olds is, at best, 50:50.
Here’s a suggestion. Why doesn’t Mr Ford write about vegetarianism? This is one of his (many) areas of moral expertise. For instance, I understand that Seventh Day Adventists practice vegetarianism. Is this true? Is it for Biblical reasons? Was Jesus a vegetarian? If not, why not? What is the Orthodox Jewish position on factory farming? Did the ancient Hebrews practice genetic engineering on their livestock and give their pigs steroids? Is Mr Ford a member of PETA? If so, are PETA girls horribly skinny (like Ann Coulter) with disturbing stick-like arms and legs? I’m thinking maybe they are. Also, are they easy? During sex are they quiet (good) or do they prattle away about how Dr Atkins was 260 pounds when he died (bad)? Please help me!
October 11, 2004:
More To Love
Remember when Luke Ford was the Internet’s leading humourist?
“NO!”
Oh.
Well I do. Or at least I think I do. Admittedly its been awhile since Mr Ford was consistently funny. Something happened about six months ago. I’m not sure what, but I suspect that it might have something to do with Mr Ford’s stunning success as a book author. Riding tall in the saddle, he probably started to look down on the blogosphere and his little army of fans. “I’m too good for them,” he may have thought to himself. “Blogging is for losers. Blog reading is for even bigger losers. Suckers!”
Yet every so often, Our Moral Leader comes down from his high horse and using his brilliant book authoring intellect creates an amusing blog entry or two. I think my favourite Luke Ford genre is the sniffy review. This is where Mr Ford goes to a religious lecture — with a book to entertain himself during the boring bits — fidgets, rolls his eyes, and sighs deeply, before heading home to write up a critique. I don’t know why this amuses me so. But it does remind me of the old saying: “Those that can’t do, teach. Those that can’t teach, teach gym. Those that can’t teach gym, lecture about G-d. Those that can’t lecture about G-d, attend lectures about G-d, fidget, roll their eyes, sigh deeply, pull out a book, read during the boring bits, and then race home in their serial killer vans to write sniffy reviews for their blogs.” Really, it’s quite a popular saying.
My second favourite Luke Ford genre is the cut and pasted IM conversation with a busty babe. Consider, for example, this convo with put-upon “best friend” Miss Seipp:
Mr Ford: Darling, precious, how are you feeling?
Miss Seipp: Better but still coughing!
Mr Ford: ooooooh, poor boopie
Mr Ford: Are you sure you are not a C cup?
Miss Seipp: Not since I lost a few pounds
Mr Ford: ahh
Miss Seipp: Went to the Pacific Dining Car for breakfast this morning and saw Frank Luntz the Rep pollster.
And I thought I was lame and boring! It does wonders for my self-confidence to discover the mutual vapidity of these two.
Or consider the following IM exchange with another of Mr Ford’s intimates, “professional girlfriend” Ms Vicki:
Ms Vicki: yea i want to go into porn
Mr Ford: are you a dancer or escort?
Ms Vicki: Escort
Mr Ford: whoa
Ms Vicki: big girl right
Ms Vicki: i’m on a diet
Mr Ford: what is your height and weight and measurements?
Ms Vicki: 44DDD
After visiting Ms Vicki’s website things are starting to make sense. Miss Vicki lives with fellow “professional girlfriend” Ms Rose. Both are (very) sexy BBWs. Just think what happens when Our Moral Leader’s book royalty cheques roll in and he invites these two lovelies over to the hovel for some cuddling. Let’s look at the tale of the tape:
Ms Vicki: 5’6″ 287 lbs
Ms Rose: 5’9″ 352 lbs
Mr Ford: 5’5¾” 226 lbs
Combined these three lovebirds weigh in at 865 pounds. Now we know why Our Moral Leader sleeps on the floor: structural engineers have yet to design a bed that could support all that concentrated lovemaking.
I also have a new hypothesis as to why Mr Ford has not been as productive of late. Perhaps when rolling around on the floor with his voluptuous ladyfriends, poor Mr Ford got caught in an unfortunate position and his head was horribly squished. Six months later and his brain still hasn’t fully recovered.
