I write, people will be shocked to learn, about American Idol, telling the epic tale of my permanent branding by an in-law of the show.

Elsewhere in the anthology, read the majesty of Stacey Grenrock Woods, Neal Pollack, Mark Lisanti, Jerry Stahl…as I say some of the very funniest. Buy it now!

The New Yorker’s Book Bench mentioned my essay in their item on the book, kindly in general but taking on my declaration that Idol is the most dramatic stage performance ever, suggesting life and death gladiator matches were perhaps more…life or death’ish. To which I say, how can you declare the mere life of a captive marauder to the potential for unlimited fame that our young dreamers stand on the cusp of at the height of the celebrity age? Doesn’t even come close!

His letter includes the line: “While I was not at Hampshire during the 1980s, colleagues and alumni who were have questioned the “composite” characters created by Rushfield. In reality, most students then pursued their education with serious intent and maturity, as they do now”

Now I guess I’ve tip-toed around this question, by just saying the book is about me, and I want to focus on my experience. And some people may have been hard working students, while some were not, i have no idea… I was just writing about my own experience,…not meaning to cast general aspersions beyond the scope of my own experience…etc.

And all that is true, that is my meaning.

However, when the criticism begins to suggest that i am more or less creating a fantasy world of deadbeats out of a land of dilligent, nose to grindstone, highly motivated pHd’s in the making, I must respond.

There may have been many in that above category. It many have even been in the majority. And Hampshire since for all i know may have become a veritable sweat shop of academic labor. But the stereotype of Frisbee U did not come from nothing. My friends, my extended circle may or may not have been the typical Hampshire student, but if they were a minority, they were an extremely sizable one.

A few facts and question about Hampshire College circa 86- 88, the years when the events described in this book occurred:

- The drop out rate at the time. If some would care to pony it up, im not going to name exact figures because i dont want to be off, but im willing to bet anything they would be very significantly higher than the liberal arts average of the time. If it’s not, I’ll be delighted to learn that and put up another post here so proclaiming.

- I had a friend there who went three years without finishing a class. And until the end of that period, no one seemed to notice or care. That’s one example. I’m sure if President Hexter wants to check the academic records of the period, he would find thats not the only one. By far.

- As described in the book, one student earned her diploma by getting her friends to lie on the ground in the shape of a peace sign and renting a helicopter to fly over and shoot it as the center of a music video. Buy me a cup of coffee and I’ll share with you a few dozen examples comparable to that.

- The presence of drugs on the campus. If anyone truly wants to dispute the ubiquity of marijuana and other drugs on Hampshire campus at that time, if anyone who was there from 1986- 88 can look me in the eye and say they rarely encountered them, heard about them, were aware of them, say more or less every time they walked across the quad, I would really have to look that person right back and ask, do you really really think your Hampshire experience of the period was more representative than mine? Really?

- And what no one seems to dispute, not President Hexter, nor anyone else, is the part of my book this the really crucial climax here – the rise of the armies of PC’dom, the little mini-stalins they unleashed and the body count that crusade claimed, all tacitly or actively abetted by the school. People lives were horribly horribly damaged in that period in a way that school is directly responsible, and has never addressed their part in those issues. So if we’re really going to reopen the record of the past, how about we take a look at that too folks? Not just the question of what percent of the student body was stoned what percent of the day?

In any event, this is, truly an argument about the past. If you have read my book, you will know that the final third is devoted to the end of this period, how by the time 1988 came around, the atmosphere that had encouraged this sort of debauchery was behind us. The word “Twilight” is in the very title of the book for crying out loud.

But happy to debate the question forever. I would just ask those who were there at the time and say that their experience was completely different than mine, what makes you so sure that your experience was more typical or representative of the era than mine?

Your servant,

Richard Rushfield

Q: Aren’t you presenting a very stereotypical view of Hampshire students? I mean, all my friends at Hampshire were really hard-working, dedicated seekers of knowledge?

A. The vision of Hampshire when I arrived as a wasteland of self-absorbed deadbeats may a stereotypical view, but at that time, if memory serves the drop-out rate (or non-completion rate was somewhere pushing up close to 50 percent, which suggests that the stereotype held for somewhere close to half the school.

Q: Do you really think this is what Hampshire is like today/was like for everyone?

A: I can not speak to that at all. This is my own memoir of my experience during a very particular time (1986 – 88). Whether anyone before or after, or even during experienced the same is for them to say. But as the subtitle of the book suggests, I was writing about the twilight of an era; when the carnival atmosphere that had reigned over this sub-strata of America from the late 60’s through to the 80’s gave way to the much more self-serious, earnest age that we live in today. So even in the book, this carnival is dying away.

Q: Aren’t you just glorifying people who were a bunch of jerks and your own irresponsible jerky behavior?

A: Portraying is not glorifying. At least it wasn’t intended to be. I think I make out my youthful jerky behavior as fairly jerky and if I show the what led to it, that’s not to justify it. Jerks are jerks and dicks were dicks and no one is saying otherwise.
That said, to while my comrades and I were certainly ridiculous, that doesn’t make the self-righteousness of the rest of the school any less insufferable.
And all that said, while the Dicks were certainly “not nice” there was a rather beautiful purity in their total refusal to get swept away into the stream of life, their almost monastic refusnik tendencies.

Q: Why should I care about these idiots?
A: That is perhaps the hardest question of all to answer. For starters, if you don’t care about them, you don’t and nothing I can say will change that. But I guess the reason I thought these characters were worth preserving on the page is that they represent an apotheosis of an era, of my Generation’s ethos of ironic distance from the world. Coming as it did at the end of the disasters of the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s, just as the baby boom were taking the reins of American culture, the Dicks absolutely refusal to take anything seriously can be seen as the only possible route for generational survival in a hostile landscape. Certainly, that ethos is what became the driving force of the one moment when my generation found ourselves in the drivers seat of the culture – the Grunge Era, that brief window between the Baby Boom and their children when we were at the center, and ironic nihilism was our animating ethos, for better or worse. And it was born here, on a moldy, unaired couch at Hampshire College.

That’s enough questions for tonight. If you have any more, please leave in the comments section and I’ll try to answer soon as I can. Check back for events info shortly. And as ever, find out more about the book or buy yourself a copy by clicking right here.

Will chime in later on the road ahead to bring this incredibly important story to the world, but you can commemorate this day but checking out my playlist for listening while you read the book (if you can listen to music and read a book at the same time. I can’t really, but i can go back and forth) over at the wonderful largeheartedboy site.

As ever you can get all your information about the book and order it by clicking on the links here.

Or join the Facebook group here, where violent argument has already broken out.

Many thanks to all the wonderful family and friends who have supported me along the way, and to the great people at Gotham who brought this tale to the world.

More later tonight on the controversy already breaking out about the stunning revelations within this book and my answer to the eternal “Why should I care about these people?” question.

Here are the things that trouble after the season finale:

So the last episode featured both Sloane and Terrance in separate plotlines. Their stories were unrelated and I’m not saying they should have been given a whole scene together, but when you have two third-tier characters appear in an episode and they happen to be father and daughter, don’t you have to service that fact somehow, just maybe have Ari yell on the phone to E, “Say hi to Sloane. I’m about to [insert anal rape metaphor] her father.” I’m no Emmy winning 30 Rock writer, but don’t you have to do something just to acknowledge that you the show runner know that Sloane is Terrance’s daughter? Which raises the real question, do the Entourage writers remember that? Are they capable or remembering a plot line of their show from two seasons back?

Next question, how the hell is it possible that Vince still hasn’t bought Drama a car? He’s bought Turtle like ten. E gets given a couple cars by Vince every season. But his own brother, Johnny Drama, doesn’t have a single Lamborgini to show for 16 seasons of Entourage? Can this possibly be an oversight? Or have they already figured out the finale to the whole series, a hundred years from now when it finally gets taken off the air, they will go out with Vince buying Drama the entire Formula One Fleet, if that is a thing.

A lot of cause for reflection while flying over Arizona with Virgin’s updated crummy selection of channels.

Read this hugely important article here.

And if you needed a reason to love Mad Men’s Christina Hendricks, she lists “Hot Lunch” as her favorite movie scene of all time in an interview with Movieline. A woman of enormous taste and discernment.

Anyway, you can read it here.

Since writing it I’ve gone to see Zombieland and A Serious Man. Enjoyed both very much. Both made me remember my youth dealing with cranky old Jewish people across formica table tops and battling the undead.

Read the rest here at Gawker.