We told you yesterday about the backstory behind Carmen Callil's cancelled book party, which fell apart when the French embassy decided it didn't want to fete a woman who compared (though, one hastens to add in all fairness, did not fully equate) the treatment of Jews in Vichy France to the treatment of Palestinians in modern Israel. I talked with one of the people who protested to the embassy; another complainant has come forward on his own blog. Bruce Kesler first wrote about his objections Monday morning, then followed up with a reaction to our coverage, which he calls "utter rubbish." As you can imagine, that attracted my attention. (Update: Further efforts to clarify my position with Mr. Kesler have led me to the conclusion that he's one of those bloggers who's more interested in showing his readers he's "right" than in honest discussion of complex issues. Wish I'd known that before spending any significant time on his complaints, but oh well.)

What raises Kesler's hackles most, it seems, is the "prejudical attitude" he sees in Ms. Callil's remarks about "fundamentalist Jews," which I can only assume I didn't refute strongly enough to satisfy him. He also quibbles over another statement by Callil, who wondered, "Isn't this a violation of that amendment you have?" To which he points out, "No, it is not a violation of the First Amendment, Ms. Callil. It is the First Amendment as it should be: Americans speaking out freely about what is wrong with your book." Which is all well and good—and, frankly, the whole issue of how the First Amendment only covers suppression of free speech by American governments, and not by private citizens or institutions, is actually a personal bugaboo of mine...but I didn't think yesterday's item was the right place to get into an argument about the spirit of free speech versus the wording of the Bill of Rights.

Instead, I tried to present Callil's viewpoint, along with the viewpoint of one of the protestors, and give you space to figure out how you felt about it all. Where Kesler repeatedly states that he thinks the French embassy acted correctly, I purposefully didn't say that, although well within their rights, I believe they punked out on their commitments to Callil and her publisher. Because yesterday's story wasn't about what I thought about what happened, just about what happened. At the risk of getting all meta on y'all, I know blogs in general, and my posts on this blog in particular, often chart an ambiguous path between those two territories. It's an issue, I grapple with it, you probably don't want to hear my troubles, blah blah blah, where's the publishing news? So, yeah, moving on...but just to say, Mr. Kesler, if you don't like what people in the news have to say, please don't blame the press for covering them! (As I say, further involvement with Kesler has convinced me that he's not interested in open discussion of the complex issues associated with Callil's book party and its cancellation, but in belaboring his alleged rightness. I'm sure he's very happy at what he does, just as I'm happy to leave him to his work and concentrate on mine.)