“When we disagreed, we still disagreed as friends.”
- Condoleezza Rice, speaking in Europe about our relationship with France
___________________
Too true! This reminds me of my relationship with my good friend, a fellow writer I’ll call “Scott.” We’ve had our bumpy moments, but we’ve always remained friends. Let me give you an example.
A couple of years ago, I proposed a boycott of a certain TV network whom I was pretty sure was ripping us writers off. Nefarious bookkeeping resulted in lower-than-fair royalty checks, and I wasn’t going to stand for it.
I figured Scott would be into this plan, because he and I had worked on the same show together. But when I called him, he was… difficult. “Look,” he said, “I’m your friend, and I really think you’re overreacting. It’s probably just that the our show didn’t earn very much money in syndication. After all, the ratings-”
I cut him off, the way friends can without worrying about hurting the other guy’s feelings. “Nope. They’re ripping us off, and they’re gonna pay! Are you with me!?”
“Uh, no,” said Scott, and that was cool. We’re pals. So I went about organizing the boycott, taking the network to court, picketing the studio, and Scott stayed out of it. Which was fine.
Sure, I might’ve said a few disparaging things about him during those days. Well sure, I said a lot of things. I told all my friends and colleagues about how Scott was a dink, and a scab and a traitor. I might’ve snubbed him at a few social events. I didn’t say anything when my friends would tear up his scripts in public, make fun of him and his wife (who was undeniably plump and had a slight lateral lisp - I didn’t just make that up!), blacklist him from future jobs, take him outside at parties and beat him up a little… I sort of let that happen, because we were squabbling, as friends do.
By a year later, Scott wasn’t getting any jobs from my associates, wasn’t being invited to my friends’ parties, and he was kind of a joke in the community. People were sort of forced not to associate with him or say anything nice about him, at least in my circle. I also made sure that his name was not considered for any jobs that I had the power to influence. My buddy and are were kind of on the outs, to be sure, but that’s friendship for you. I still loved him, of course.
So then it turns out that the show that had started all this really hadn’t done too well in syndication. No money had been kept from us. Scott had been right all along. I was like, “Ooops!”
Did I apologize to Scott? Nah. Friendship’s not like that. Real friends don’t have to apologize to each other after wrongfully blackening each others’ names or depriving them of their livelihood or fostering hatred for ‘em and then turning their backs as others beat ‘em up or anything like that. Real friends understand that things like this happen sometimes, and looking back and pointing fingers about who did what to whom is for people who aren’t that close.
Today, Scott’s almost back on his feet. He’s lost his house and his wife left him (presumably with a quick “Sho long, shucker!” as she waddled out the door), and he’s got a few dermatological and hygienic, um, challenges, yes, but he’s the same old Scott. And we’re pals. I may even have him over for dinner sometime soon, at least after he gets himself cleaned up a bit (he really is totally gross at the moment). Yeah, some of my other pals will scratch their heads about our sudden reconciliation, but I don’t care. That’s what friendship’s all about.
Fanny Roborat
21 comments
Trackback from BlogBites - Real friends don't have to apologize to each other after wrongfully blackening each others' names or depriving them of their livelihood or fostering hatred for 'em and then turning their backs as others beat 'em up or anything like that. Real friends understand that things like this happen sometimes, and looking back and pointing fingers about who did what to whom is for people who aren't that close.
February 9, 2005 at 9:17 pm
A Hermit
February 9, 2005 at 5:42 pm
1Now THAT was some top rank snark! Nicely done…
norbizness
February 9, 2005 at 5:58 pm
2Oh, you television people.
P.S. Scott = Howie Mandel, right? You can tell me, I’ll keep it on the down low.
Scott
February 9, 2005 at 6:27 pm
3Fuck off.
–Scott
Mike Z
February 9, 2005 at 7:50 pm
4So that’s why paper towels aren’t called “Scott-towels” anymore?
TheExMrsScott
February 9, 2005 at 8:38 pm
5L’amour signifie il ne faut jamais dire que tu es desole.
Bob
February 9, 2005 at 9:03 pm
6By golly, that was inspirational. I feel a sudden urge to go out and alienate some friends of my own.
tess
February 10, 2005 at 1:52 am
8Kinda reminds me of what someone had to say to me about a spat I was having with a former friend, “You didn’t just burn the bridge, you . . . um . . .”
“Sowed salt in the fields?”
“Actually, I was going to say, ‘lobbed cows infected with Mad Cow disease’ over the castle walls. But what you said is more poetic.”
Thompson
February 10, 2005 at 7:26 am
9Yes, but your friend’s is so evocative. -grin- I’ll definitely have to remember that one.
Mary
February 10, 2005 at 11:16 am
10Did you also say “Ignore the network but punish Scott?” Or, was that someone else?
Mary Kay
February 10, 2005 at 11:46 am
11Hey, to show our solidarity and loyalty to Adam, let’s all quit saying, “Great Scott!” and start saying “Great Freedom!”
ms rita
February 10, 2005 at 11:50 am
12thank goodness for your commentary. otherwise i think i would be depressed or something.
Lynne
February 10, 2005 at 2:33 pm
13So, off topic but interesting. Google Jeff Gannon. He’s the “reporter” who asked Bush the question about how could Bush possibly be expected to negotiate with people like Senators Reid and Clinton since they were so divorced from reality.
Turns out his name is not Gannon, he’s not a reporter and he runs a couple of male prostitute web sites on the side. I’m not kidding. And like Sy Sperling, he’s not just the president, he’s a trick!
How will the administration spin this?
Jerry
February 10, 2005 at 3:16 pm
14Well, I guess they’ll spin it sorta like this:
Earlier this week, when asked about Gannon’s access, White House press secretary Scott McClellan essentially threw up his hands and said he has no control over who is in the press room and whom the president calls on during his rare press conferences. “I don’t think it’s the role of the press secretary to get into the business of being a media critic or picking and choosing who gets credentials,” he told the Washington Post.
Of course:
“That’s like [McClellan] saying, ‘I’m chief of staff at a hospital and when a patient dies in surgery and it turns out the guy operating wasn’t a doctor … [it’s] not my business to be a medical critic,’” says Ron Suskind, a former Wall Street Journal reporter who has written extensively about the inner workings of the Bush administration. “Nobody is asking him to be a media critic. They’re asking him to make sure people in the press room — the ones using up precious time during extremely rare press conferences — are acting journalists, honest brokers dealing with genuine inquiry to get at the truth.”
But, heck even the Secret Service was taken by surprise! How the heck could they know a ringer, using a false name and suspect credentials had been brought in to ask softball (hell, not softball, badminton) questions?!?! It’s not like they check out everybody with close physical access to the Chimp-in-Charge, right?
Yes, folks, Faux New is just not enough, not in the face of the “liberal media” trying to tear down our honest, forthoming, wise, compassionate President.
Jerry
February 10, 2005 at 3:53 pm
15Ms. Rice, 2003: “Forget France, ignore Germany, forgive Moscow.” And the War Chimp and the new, improved (hahaha) Secretary of State think that France and Germany are as brain dead as the US voting public. To quote Gomer, “su’prise, su’prise, su’prise!”
J. Deighton
February 10, 2005 at 4:28 pm
16I doubt it was the same Scott, but I do know a Scott and I did kick him in the shins today, just in case it was the same guy. I got yer back Adam old pal.
Andres
February 10, 2005 at 4:40 pm
17Does this have something to do with France?
Mike Z
February 10, 2005 at 4:57 pm
18It only has something to do with France insofar as France is part of “Old Europe.” Where “old” is meant like “My old buddy Europe” and definitely not like “obsolete, useless, worn out Europe.”
Emmarie
February 10, 2005 at 5:48 pm
19But you know what’s not friendship? When they go whine to everybody else so there’s all the other kids on _their_ side and you’re just standing there also because nobody will listen to your side of the story. Then you just have to beat them all up.
Alice
February 23, 2005 at 7:32 pm
20The most outrageous part of the France fiasco is that restaurants here in uber-liberal Durham, North Carolina actually still have “freedom fries” on the menu. It was like watching a bunch of 4th graders when that whole “freedom fries” thing first happened.
David
February 26, 2005 at 8:48 pm
21Alice,
Your’re kidding, of course. Oh hell, no you’re not kidding. Of course, North Carolina’s Helmsians, especially back in his glory days as a journalist, knew how to fry freedom, and old habits do die hard. I’ll have to check the restaurants in Ocoee (Florida). They certainly used to know how to “hang ‘em high.” Freedom, schmeedom, for the Other.