Scalia: a non-controversy with rude gestures
The Boston Herald's latest (and hopefully last) word in the minor media flap about what Justice Scalia did, whether it was obscene, and even whether he is an Italian jurist (in the sense of ethnicity, yes; in the sense of nationality, no; Scalia insisted that he is an American jurist, which is both true and silly, since there was no need to identify his citizenship or residence in a domestic news piece, but his extraction was relevant to what he said and did) is this piece: Photographer: Herald Got It Right.
Scalia, no stranger to controversy (the duck-hunting contretemps in which he went out hunting with Dick Cheney (seems braver in retrospect, now), whose energy task force paper case would soon be heard by the Court; the question whether he would recuse from the Newdow pledge case after a speech he made went to the merits of the claim; the (in my opinion) non-scandal involving his presence at a scholarly program which included tennis) and in particular media controversy (recall an incident involving a student journalist who had their recorder confiscated), now finds himself again in the middle.
This time, in a humorous moment more reminiscent of his sometime hunting partner (see, e.g. Cheney Dismisses Critic with Obscenity, washpost), only without the element of personal confrontation, Scalia engaged in the following exchange:
Reporter (paraphrase): Scalia, J, you just participated in Sunday's special Mass; that could make people question your impartiality in matters of Church and State.
Scalia (his version): "I responded, jocularly, with a gesture that consisted of fanning the fingers of my right hand under my chin. Seeing that she did not understand, I said, ‘That’s Sicilian,’ and explained its meaning."
Scalia (a witnesses' version): "The judge paused for a second, then looked directly into my lens and said, ‘To my critics, I say, ‘Vaffanculo,’ " punctuating the comment by flicking his right hand out from under his chin, Smith said.
[The Italian phrase means "(expletive) you."]
So, if true, Scalia did literally "respond jocularly" and with a gesture that consisted of..., but the two parts go together.
The literal meaning of Scalia's brush-off gesture is not obscene. It's a buzz-off, an "I take no position" kind of thing. Like pushing the air away, it distances the speaker from the subject or target. But when you pair it with its commonly associated phrase, you can have something a bit more vulgar. I wouldn't say obscene, but certainly not polite.
In the end, I think the whole thing is a bit of teapotted tempestry, which continues to draw attention for the personality (and fame and controversy) of the central figure rather than for any real content.
After gesturing, according to the same witness, Scalia "immediately knew he’d made a mistake, and said, ‘You’re not going to print that, are you?’" Alas, he should know that few reporters (or photographers) will today honor such a request. After all, it's interesting, it'll draw readers, and it's mildly embarassing.
I guess Scalia's lucky he wasn't a Texas A&M fan rooting for his team.
Scalia, no stranger to controversy (the duck-hunting contretemps in which he went out hunting with Dick Cheney (seems braver in retrospect, now), whose energy task force paper case would soon be heard by the Court; the question whether he would recuse from the Newdow pledge case after a speech he made went to the merits of the claim; the (in my opinion) non-scandal involving his presence at a scholarly program which included tennis) and in particular media controversy (recall an incident involving a student journalist who had their recorder confiscated), now finds himself again in the middle.
This time, in a humorous moment more reminiscent of his sometime hunting partner (see, e.g. Cheney Dismisses Critic with Obscenity, washpost), only without the element of personal confrontation, Scalia engaged in the following exchange:
Reporter (paraphrase): Scalia, J, you just participated in Sunday's special Mass; that could make people question your impartiality in matters of Church and State.
Scalia (his version): "I responded, jocularly, with a gesture that consisted of fanning the fingers of my right hand under my chin. Seeing that she did not understand, I said, ‘That’s Sicilian,’ and explained its meaning."
Scalia (a witnesses' version): "The judge paused for a second, then looked directly into my lens and said, ‘To my critics, I say, ‘Vaffanculo,’ " punctuating the comment by flicking his right hand out from under his chin, Smith said.
[The Italian phrase means "(expletive) you."]
So, if true, Scalia did literally "respond jocularly" and with a gesture that consisted of..., but the two parts go together.
The literal meaning of Scalia's brush-off gesture is not obscene. It's a buzz-off, an "I take no position" kind of thing. Like pushing the air away, it distances the speaker from the subject or target. But when you pair it with its commonly associated phrase, you can have something a bit more vulgar. I wouldn't say obscene, but certainly not polite.
In the end, I think the whole thing is a bit of teapotted tempestry, which continues to draw attention for the personality (and fame and controversy) of the central figure rather than for any real content.
After gesturing, according to the same witness, Scalia "immediately knew he’d made a mistake, and said, ‘You’re not going to print that, are you?’" Alas, he should know that few reporters (or photographers) will today honor such a request. After all, it's interesting, it'll draw readers, and it's mildly embarassing.
I guess Scalia's lucky he wasn't a Texas A&M fan rooting for his team.
Related Posts (on one page):
- Supreme Court: Knock, don't knock, we won't exclude
- Scalia: a non-controversy with rude gestures
- Scalia and language
- Scalia MP1 followup: Branding and Casey
- Scalia Mega-Post: the Big One (part I. section A. subsection 1.)