Been thinking about that guy all day. Never did buy either of the books I got hung up on, so I was dinking about riding down to Tattered Cover (our one great Denver institution, a luxurious five-story bookstore packed with quiet alcoves fitted with plush wingback where you can nestle in and read for hours) to buy a copy of The Thief's Journal, or at least peruse it.

No time.

So I'll just continue obsessing about the idea, that's my preference anyway.

Found a wonderful entry from a site devoted to the boy. Check out this opening:

French novelist, playwright and poet Jean Genet was born in Paris on December 19, 1910. Abandoned by his parents, he spent much of his youth in an institution for juvenile delinquents. At the age of ten, he was accused of stealing. Although innocent of the charge, having been described as a thief, the young boy resolved to be a thief. "Thus," wrote Genet, "I decisively repudiated a world that had repudiated me."

Between 1930 and 1940, he wandered through various European countries, living as a thief and male prostitute. Eventually, he found himself in Hitler's Germany where he felt strangely out of place. "I had a feeling of being in a camp of organized bandits. This is a nation of thieves, I felt. If I steal here, I accomplish no special act that could help me to realize myself. I merely obey the habitual order of things. I do not destroy it." So Genet hastened on to a country that still obeyed a more conventional moral code.

In 1943, after being imprisoned for theft, Genet began writing. Ignoring traditional plot and psychology, Genet's plays rely heavily on ritual, transformation, illusion and interchangeable identities. His experiences in prison would inform much of his work. The homosexuals, prostitutes, thiefs and outcasts of his plays are trapped in self-destructive circles. They express the despair and loneliness of a man caught in a maze of mirrors, trapped by an endless progression of images that are, in reality, merely his own distorted reflection.

That sounds pretty enticing, I'd be proud to claim that life, except the crap about ignoring traditional plot and psychology. What! I think that's why I didn't like it. So I guess that's still my opening. Write Jean Genet the way he should have done it the first time.

I'm still kind of embarassed to admit I like The OC, but it really does enthrall me. I'm way behind, though. It wasn't going to be on for a month, so I kept putting off watching it. I'm always scared not to have anymore of something. I still have five pages left to read in In Cold Blood, because I can't bear not to have anymore. I actually have two unread chapters in Conclusive Evidence, the freaking book I named this blog after. Just love it too much to spend every word.

But now the OCs have been piling up, I think I had five left to see, so I watched one each of the past two nights. Didn't cry like the first couple episodes, but did come close once, at an unlikely moment. It's kind of annoying the plot gynmastics they keep putting these characters through, but I'm falling in love with nearly all the main characters, and the dialogue is joy to behold. (The banter is starting to remind me of the first few seasons of Gilmore Girls.)

And that boy--that 25-year-old man playing a boy, Benjamin McKenzie Schenkkan. That boy. Not just dreamy to look at, the kid will break your heart. He won't be doing TV much longer. As long as the OC contract lasts, I'll wager, then he'll make the leap to the big screen.

I guess I ought to spell out why I love it again, but I did that already in August, and then expanded on it three days later. Same reasons. And I'm too worn out to think that hard. Tonight, I just wanted to share a little of my affection.

Remember him? (Bin Laden.) Nice to hear somebody still interested in catching him, instead of focusing all our resources on creating a nightmare in Iraq.

Wes Clark apparently feels the same way.

He's giving a New Hampshire speech today outlining a three-point plan:

First, Clark said he would pressure Saudi Arabia to contribute to a joint U.S.-Saudi commando force to scour the Afghan-Pakistani border where bin Laden is thought to be hiding. . . .

"They've downplayed more serious threats in other parts of the world," he said. "In fact, it's been months since Mr. Bush has even mentioned Osama bin Laden. These days, the only name we hear is Saddam Hussein, and the only country we hear about is Iraq."

Second, Clark proposed reassigning some of the intelligence specialists, linguists, and special operations forces now searching Iraq for weapons of mass destruction to the hunt for bin Laden.

Third, he said the United States needs to repair relations with allies and friends.

"With his unilateral march into Iraq, President Bush has scorned many of our key allies, preventing the necessary cooperation to destroy al-Qaida," Clark said.

Good move. Not much need for a Dem to focus on Iraq, the situation there is doing that for them. But things are so shitty there, it's easy to forget Iraq is a double disaster: one inside the country, another in distracting us from the nightmare that had become Afghanastan.

Every time I seem so Average Joe interview on TV and the dufus says he supports the Iraq war because he (and it's usually he) remembers 9/11, I slap my forehead and yell Doh! Not only does it make me cringe that only an American would use the logic that "some Arab hurt us, so we're going to massacre some others," but it's actually 9/11 that's been ignored here. Remember 9/11?

Remember who masterminded it? He's still alive. Remember 9/11? Remember what we collectively decided after the attack allowed it to happen? The terrorist breeding ground and training camp of a country Afghanistan. We left a power vacuum there after the Soviets pulled out and we did too in the late 80s, and it descended into chaos, and now we're allowing it to drift toward the same path.

Remember 9/11. Remember 9/11.

If Wesley Clark can strike that chord and continue to make it resonate, he may really be on to something.