Defending Stoogology

3stooges.jpgChristopher Hitchens wrote this Vanity Fair piece earlier this year in which he explains why men are generally funnier than women. Dubuque (Iowa) Tribune-Herald columnist Rebecca Christian took offense to Hitchens’ article (her column is not online) and, in so doing, made several disparaging remarks regarding those icons of American male comedy, The Three Stooges. Those are fightin’ words to the Kirkendall brothers, prompting this letter to the editor (registration required) from my brother Matt, which provides as follows:

Dear Editor:
I am responding to a recent column from Saturday columnist, Ms. Rebecca Christian. She wrote expressing her irritation at a Vanity Fair article by Christopher Hitchens, but included in this a general meditation on women’s inability to appreciate male humor. Unfortunately, she made several disparaging remarks about the Three Stooges with some particularly cheap shots directed at Curly.
In this way, she demonstrated a woeful lack of appreciation of the Three Stooges and by implication the entire male philosophical discipline known as “Stoogology” — the study of the Three Stooges and their impact on society. Her comments demand a response.
She is correct in her assertion that women generally do not understand the Stooge phenomenon. For men, however, the Stooges provide a framework to develop an understanding of the world and their place in it.
One of the most important and time honored responsibilities of any father is passing on to his son a passion and proper respect for the Three Stooges.
In their unique way, the Stooges teach valuable life lessons that all men can identify with and can use to try to fashion their own lives. Some of these lessons include:
* Life can be painful (i.e. eye pokes, face slaps).
* Question authority (be it as a teacher, plumber, census taker, columnist; most any job can be pretty much made up as you go along).
* Despite your best efforts whatever you do may not be appreciated (ex: a pie in the face).
These are tough lessons to be sure. It is a choice, you can spend thousands of dollars and years of their lives sending your sons to university to study obscure philosophers to learn these lessons, or you can allow them to watch Stooge shorts on men focused cable channels to learn the same things.
An added advantage is that even basic Stooge knowledge can be broadening as it allows your son to come to appreciate other important social commentary of our time such as that provided by Benny Hill, Monty Python, ESPN commercials, and many others.
Several years ago, a national magazine proposed that every man’s personality type could be summarized as being one of the Three Stooges.
Most men are Larry; they just want to get along with everyone. The forceful personality types are Moe. These are the guys that run businesses, are corporate types and are generally SOBs.
It was in fact the Curlys, that women found most fascinating. One woman noting, “I would marry a Larry, but dating a Curly would be the most fun.” Curlys tend to be exciting and prone to excess. Typically they burn out early. Unfortunately, this describes the life of the real Curly, Jerome Horowitz, who was famous for his girlfriends, several wives and dying at a young age.
Other famous Curly types have included Marlon Brando, Babe Ruth, Elvis and John Lennon. Significantly, former President Bill Clinton was felt to be a Curly, whereas, President George W. Bush was classified as a Shemp. Go figure.
Within this framework, the columnist Christopher Hitchens can be classified as a Curly. He is prone to polemical excess and his schtick is to be controversial. He tries to impress the girls with his vocabulary, his British accent and his peculiar worldview.
However, the TH columnist should not take her dislike of Mr. Hitchens’ column as an excuse to condemn Curlys as a whole. In that way, she is insulting a large part of the male population and she may be seriously limiting her options for fun dating in the future. She should remember that in the end: “Soitenly, we all are just victims of coicumstance, N’yuk, N’yuk, N’yuk!”
Matthew J. Kirkendall
Dubuque, IA.
Kirkendall is a physician at Dubuque Internal Medicine.

Charles Koch on Market-Based Management

koch.gifC.S. Hayden. who is serving an internship at Koch Industries, Inc., the world’s largest privately-held company, provides this entertaining interview of Charles G. Koch, the company’s CEO. Koch is the author of The Science of Success: How Market-Based Management Built the World’s Largest Private Company (Wiley 2007), which he expands upon in the interview. Of particular interest is Koch’s view toward Koch’s advantages in the marketplace:

Q: What separates this company from those in the Fortune 500?
Mr. Koch: The MBM culture and management philosophy are key. We are privately held, which gives us tremendous advantages in this business environment of regulation and litigation. Also, we have continuity of leadership. As Deming said, constancy of purpose is a key. A 20% yearly return will make your money double every 3.5 years, which adds up over time. Others try to change their purpose all the time, they have some successes, but they end up bankrupt and have to start all over again.
Q: What are the advantages and disadvantages of the private vs. public ownership structure?
Mr. Koch: In today’s regulatory and litigious society, about every company is better off private. The only reason to go public would be if the shareholders want liquidity or if the business can finance takeovers through public offerings. [I think this is what he said, but I’m not certain about the second point, financing takeovers; the key is that he emphasized the vast benefits of the private structure.]
The equity markets are not free markets, but highly regulated and distorted.

Also impressive is Koch’s analysis of his decision-making:

Q: What have been your best and worst decisions?
Mr. Koch: The best decision was a deal with J. Howard Marshall to gain control of the Great Northern Oil Company, which established the refining business and eventually propelled us into many other industry areas. The worst decisions are way too numerous to recount. Making so many mistakes is definitely a humbling process. The very worst decisions occur when we don’t take advantage of good deals, when we have massive opportunity costs. We get scared and don’t take risks. Fred Koch said, “Don’t take counsel of your fears.”

Koch’s final piece of advice is also insightful:

Finally, if you lose your humility, you’re on your way out.

Read the entire interview.

Catching up with Bill James

Bill%20James%20062507.jpgClear Thinkers favorite and the original sabermetrician Bill James is the subject of this Dan Ackman/Opinion Journal piece, which provides the usual dose of Jamesian good sense regarding objective analysis of baseball. James, whose original Baseball Abstract in 1977 revolutionized the way in which statistics are used to evaluate baseball players, never worked for a Major League Baseball team until 2002, when the Red Sox hired him as consultant. Among the most interesting observations that James makes in the article is the following:

Mr. James, a rationalist in a church of red-blooded true believers, takes the long view: “In any given season there is an immense amount of luck in who wins the division, even if it’s a lopsided race,” he says. “People are made very uncomfortable by the notion that our lives are random, but there are huge random parts in everything that happens. It’s uncomfortable because it’s our job to drive the randomness out and make the system work.”

Read the entire piece.