For years, whenever I needed a writing kickstart I would read columnist and actor Stephen Fry's collected bits, particularly the Trefusis radio broadcasts of the late eighties.

Fry had invented Prof. Donald Trefusis, a raving old dotard of a philologist at Cambridge, who was invited to speak of modern times, of which he was entirely ignorant, to a BBC audience. This self-described gentle and biddable ancient creature would combine the finer points of philology (his 30-year feud with a rival academic about the root of the Papuan word redatt, which "as some of you may know means ‘unlikely to take part in evening games'") with random abuse. For instance, he deplored chirpy morning television shows. "Such an obscene orgy of vulgarity, baseness and ignorance I hope never to witness again," while praising the jolly gunplay of Starsky and Hutch.

The climax of the Trefusis broadcasts was his visit to New York City to study iotal elisions. Naturally he was arrested while discussing something called "crack" with a large importunate man in Greenwich Village. Trefusis took it as a tribute to his great brain that the cops kept calling him Wise Guy. "But the compliment is wearing thin," he told his listeners, "and I long for liberty."

And then, to my utter glee and horror, it all came true. It happened this month in Atlanta at a conference of the American Historical Association. One of the world's finest minds, Professor Felipe Fernández-Armesto, the famed Cambridge scholar of global environmental history, author of 19 books and the current occupant of the Principe de Asturias Chair in Spanish Culture and Civilization at Tufts University in Boston, decided to cross the street.

He was accosted by a young man who told him he was jaywalking. The professor thanked him and continued on his way. The man said he was a cop, the professor could see no evidence of a uniform (he later said the man was wearing a rather louche garment, a "jerkin" worn by someone affecting a raffish image; to me, it sounds like a bulletproof vest) and he asked the officer for his identification.

The officer took offence, kicked the professor's legs out from under him, smashed him to the pavement with the help of four other officers, crushed his neck, bloodied his head, yanked the slight 56-year-old man's arms behind him, handcuffed him and sent him to jail in a fetid paddywagon. The professor ("I do depend on my spectacles," he said later, which had gone in the ditch), had no identification beyond his Cambridge parking pass and was given no chance to explain himself.

Fernández-Armesto, the kind of man whose accent resembles that of the Queen in her Christmas message, whose suit has a matching vest, and who carries a watch chain, sat for eight hours in jail in the company of "sad, degraded or deranged" people, almost all of whom, as he pointed out in a YouTube interview, were kinder and more civilized than the police who had arrested him. Almost all were black, he said, which was evidence of racism. These people needed help, not locking up.

"Aging members of the bourgeoisie don't normally endure this," the professor said with a nervous, horrified giggle. "I was very much the odd man out."

As he explained, one of the aims of his life is to never give trouble.

"I am pathologically law-abiding."

One has an extra obligation to be so when one is the guest of a foreign country, he added. He hadn't known jaywalking was a crime that required bail of $1,371, which was eventually produced by a bail bondsman.

When he appeared in court the next day, he said three or four words, the court said "Huh?" and the judge realized that the arresting officer, Kevin Leonpacher of Niceville, Fla., had got the situation badly wrong.

Charges were dropped

The charges were dropped, Leonpacher is sullen (very much a "hominid," as the professor described him, "but that is an injustice to hominids"), the mayor of Atlanta has called the police chief on the carpet, Fernández-Armesto says he is not litigious, the American Historical Association is overcome with embarrassment, and I am a happy, albeit appalled, person because I have seen Prof. Trefusis spring to life after 20 years on the dry page.

What gladdened my heart was the response on YouTube.com. Young American downloaders were appalled by the Atlanta police blitzkrieg on a frail, older gentleman, and even defended Fernández-Armesto when one poster accused him of using "big words" to impress people. That noble poster even apologized (this never happens). Downloaders were gracious. They were angry that a visitor's basic rights and freedoms had been destroyed by thug cops. I swear, it is the young who will save that troubled country.

Overreaction elsewhere

As the story of this surreal police overreaction unfolded, Americans were overreacting elsewhere. The U.S. military bombed Somalia, one of the poorest nations on Earth (along with Afghanistan), and missed their claimed al-Qaeda targets. They invaded the Iranian consulate in Iraq, a grave violation of diplomatic rules in the first place, but also putting all American embassies at risk. The next day, the U.S. embassy in Athens was bombed.

I do think there's a link between banging up a historian, bombing the destitute and breaking the code of diplomacy. I call it American hysterical overreaction. I also call it contempt for the rule of law. My very clever editor differs with me on this last point. He suggests calling it "Nixonomics, a calculated risk on the cost-benefit of ignoring the law."

Most interesting. Perhaps we shall have a scholarly conference, as both Fernández-Armesto and his fictional doppelganger Trefusis would recommend. It has been said that Cambridge produces martyrs (like Fernández-Armesto) and Oxford burns them (Trefusis's undoubted preference). Leonpacher should be grateful that he attacked the first, and not the second.

This Week

I have been mostly reading the fine print on Ikea's recurring broken promise to deliver a bookshelf to me with haste. I breathe deeply, I practise shrugging. I have been reading the marine biologist Trevor Norton's great memoir Under Water to Get Out of the Rain: A Love Affair with the Sea, as well as Jimmy Carter's new Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid (it seems, like Carter himself, almost excessively reasonable).

In honour of David Bowie's 60^th birthday, I have been playing the two-disc DVD Best of Bowie nonstop. I still say that male critics didn't like his 1985 Dancing in the Street video with Mick Jagger because the two were clearly a pair, and this was upsetting to straight critics.

---

LETTERS:

I enjoyed Heather Mallick's article, and maybe even more, those comments of other readers. As for the "news", its available on the web in big letters if you want to read it. Opinion and Viewpoint are just that, often called for to bring a little humour and pause for thought.

For those most critical, relax...being humourously critical of Americans is probably just as Canadaian as making fun of ourselves.

—Ken Kontio | Ottawa

It's not really fair to say that this brusque treatment of a distracted intellectual by an off-duty police officer would be typical of police response anywhere in the Uited States.

Firstly, the event occurred in Atlanta, a large city with an overstretched and underfunded police force. Secondly, there has been a continuing problem in Atlanta and the surrounding counties about police officers being too quick to use their guns or batons, and complaints not being treated sufficiently seriously.

In the case of Tim Peck, for example, an off-duty Fulton County deputy broke both his legs at a restaurant. The investigating officer defended the deputy as a good officer, even after the charges against the victim were thrown out, despite a string of prior problems with the deputy. Only when it emerged that the deputy manipulated the paperwork to get the charges filed a second and even a third time, was he fired.

In Atlanta and DeKalb County, there has been a long series of questionable deaths inflicted by police officers, and retired officers have spoken of a code of silence that prevents justice from being done.

Felipe Fernandez-Armesto's case, as he acknowledges himself, was relatively trivial. If it helps to concentrate attention on the situation in and around Atlanta, where many officers appear to regard themselves as above the law, it will have served a useful purpose. The families of killed citizens such as Corey Ward and Kathryn Johnston don't seem able to make much progress.

P.S. Professor Armesto is, of course, a product of Oxford rather than Cambridge. An acerbic historian from that other place would have been less mild-mannered and genial in his reaction.

— David Harley | South Bend, IN, USA

Heather suggests one policeman can be viewed as a surrogate for a disorder she claims is the American tendency for overreaction.

Surely the more powerful event, in terms of serving as a surrogate for American society should be the American judge who recognized the injustice, the American judicial system that set the man free, and the American citizens who were revulsed by the unjust treatment of the old man.

Can we trust Heather to point out these are the much more telling and true surrogates for American society? Don't hold your breath.

Most Americans who read Heather will, over time, come away shrugging about how Canadian media, and most of Canadian society is stuck in rut. Heather is a surrogate for the Canadians who smugly and arrogantly snivel among themselves about the inferiority of everything American.

She makes her money describing caricatures of America not the real American character.

— Kevin Wells | USA

Heather Mallick's column about American overreaction contains a bit of overreaction itself.

Certainly I can't argue that the US government has a long history of shooting first and asking questions (or consulting laws) later, but the incident involving the Atlanta police officer and the Cambridge historian is not so easily summed up.

Without facts and a proper investigation, it remains the testimony of one man against another. Moreover, this story seems to have several versions in the media, one of which includes a claim by Mr. Fernández-Armesto that the policeman in questions stole his box of mints.

I live and work in the metro-Atlanta area, and I jaywalk all the time, as do many people. Grown adults ought to have the right and the subsequent responsibility to cross the road sans police escort.

Personally I think the use of police resources to direct pedestrians to crosswalks on behalf of hotels is stupid; there is no shortage of "real" crimes in metro Atlanta. However, for the media, and in particular Ms. Mallick, to have taken such liberties in reporting this story demonstrates an unintended type of overreaction.

— Nathan DeMay | Atlanta, GA, US

About Heather Mallick's article on overreaction: judging from some of the overreaction expressed in these comments by those who disapprove of her remarks, it is not limited to redneck law enforcement in the US. Odd though, they don't dispute the event. The problem seems to be that she dared bring it up at all.

The statements of some of her detractors would lead you to believe that those at the right-wing end of the political spectrum approve of police beating the stuffing out of elderly academics. Of course the right also thought invading sovereign nations under the guise of bogus "security" concerns was a good idea too. In the face of all reality, some still seem to think so.

I've never really understood what goes on in the right-winger's head, but I think it must have something to do with fear of everyone who doesn't think precisely as they do. Odd they don't see that suppporting violations of the rights of others only guarantees that eventually they will suffer similar abuse.

In my opinion the best word on the subject came from a founding member of the American nation. Benjamin Franklin has been quoted as saying: "A people willing to trade their freedom for security deserve neither and will lose both".

—Howard Neighbor | Kamloops, B.C.

Ms.Mallick is a classic dystopian satirist.Elements of this genre include improbable fantastic adventures on imaginary voyages.Some critics view it as the the "highest" form of writing.

By linking Stephen Fry's Professor Tresfusis,the true horrific account of Professor Fernandez Armesto and the U.S. Somalian bombing,this journalist is holding up a three-way mirror.The literal among us will not recognize society's reflection.Their loss.

Suggested reading of Swift's "A Modest Proposal"would be a good start on the road to understanding.

—R. Mac Fadden | Surrey B.C.

I am normally sympathetic with critical analysis, but Mallick's editorial is a clear example of the ubiquitous failure of editorial journalism (not just the CBC's) to tell us anything meaningful.

She is trying to make an argument based on an instantial fact--the single overreaction of a police officer. This is not just her strategy, it is, in fact, the general strategy of modern editorial journalism (from Andrew Coyne to Linda McQuaig).

It's also inconsistent with the implicit claims of journalists (to be honest brokers of fact). Modern scientists do this a better way, though it's more work. Still, I recommend that Mallick and other journalists adopt this strategy, and use this structure to write their editorials:

1. Formulate an hypothesis

2. Design a study in which a balance of facts are gathered, and set the criteria for accepting/rejecting this hypothesis

3. Upon failure to falsify the hypothesis with these facts, state a qualified support of the hypothesis. Or, if the assertion is falsified, state that the hypothesis is not consistent with the gathered facts.

4. Encourage others to cricially examine the hypothesis in the future.

Do this, and your arguments are much more defensible, and much more convincing. Failure to do it suggests that you aren't really interested in being an honest broker of truth, and the profession of editorial journalism is rotten to the core.

—T. Mazur | Edmonton

So the actions of a country's police are reflective of the country's foreign policy as a whole? Interesting theory.

What kind of country's police then, would, without provocation, pepper spray and imprison peaceful protestors at a G-8 summit? Or summarily deliver up one of their own citizens to a foreign power when they knew that citizen would almost certainly be tortured by that foreign power?

Ms. Mallick, your argument gives me pause for thought. What a lawless, rogue state we are here in Canada. Thank you for helping me to see the light.

—Wade Sears | Calgary

I believe Mrs. Mallick's article has validity, in pointing out that the United States have a tendency to overreact. Her instances of US actions abroad supported her point. Yes, examples of other countries -- even Canada! -- could have been placed there, but that was not who she was looking at the time.

I think it folly to assume that her underlying tone was that there are no other forces in the world (at home or abroad) who also overreact. Take up a grain of salt, a sense of humour, a sense of irony, and read again please.

—Natasha Donnelly | Toronto

Thank you Heather. As always, after reading your articles I am left feeling a little better about the world...that is, there are those still capable of intelligent thought and thanks to the CBC those thoughts are able to be shared.

For those of you who do not like the opinions, points raised, style of writing employed by Ms. Malick - go back to Fox News or read something on canada.com, that should be more up your alley and not challenge you or offend your gentle senses.

From the rest of us, thanks again to CBC and Heather for reminding us that the world is not just filled with drivel.

PS - Although I'm currently living in Australia I am a Canadian.

—Naomi Perks | Sydney, Australia

Heather Mallick is bright and funny. I rarely laugh as much as I do while reading her opinion pieces (not 'journalism', not 'news'...). PLUS it's thought-provoking (even if I don't always agree with her).

So I picked up a copy of her book. Brilliant! She has a sexy mind.

—Al Dumas | Ottawa

The CBC’s biography of Heather Mallick, touts her as an award winning critical writer. A key element of becoming a truly critical writer is developing the appropriate attitude.

That attitude should embody the characteristics of open-mindedness tempered with healthy skepticism, intellectual humility set to work within a disciplined framework of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, analyzing, and evaluating information.

Critical writers distances themselves from unsubstantiated bias and seek out the truth in its most objective form. In her recent article “Action and overreaction in America” Ms. Mallick has clearly yielded to her own rantings, and in that process become that which she detests the most - an over-reactionary.

—Dan Farr | Port Stanley, Ont.

I was shocked and disgusted to read the commnets made about Heather Mallick's column on the professer's treatment, and United States over reactions on ( I may add....EVERYTHING! )Are we living in the red neck United States south or what?

If those comments directed towards this author are Canadian comments there is not much hope for this country. I feel more and more like I am living in George Orwell's l984.

—Cheryle Sosnowski | Lantzville, B.C.

Heather Mallick's "Action and overreaction in America" is astute, clever and hilarious.

I am ever amazed at the comments left by some CBC readers who tirelessly suggest that cutting CBC funding, gagging certain journalists or eliminating the network altogether would represent more judicious use of their tax dollars.

These people are apparently happy to use the CBC's services; how else would they find time and occasion to leave comments after CBC stories? Perhaps you could spare the rest of us the tedium of their comments by clearly labelling their posts as coming from "unsatisfiable attention-seeking whingers".

—Ken | Brisbane, Australia

I always enjoy Heather Mallick's pieces. I may not agree with them all the time, but they make for a good and entertaining read.

However, some people simply "overreact" to her pieces. I advise those people to stop reading her articles if they are so overcome with anger and hatred for her.

There are plenty of "right-wing" columnists who I'm sure the Mallick haters would enjoy much more such as Ann Coulter, Michael Coren, Ezra Levante and Rachel Marsden.

Incidently, I get a real kick out of those aforementioned columnists, too...but for very different reasons thatn I enjoy Heather's fine work.

—Buddy Exton | Calgary

As usual, even a mild column such as this, pointing out truths which are self-evident to most reasonable people, bring out the standard illitrate neanderthal response about destroying the CBC.

Respondents, seemingly confused about which nation they belong to, react to any critical analysis of U.S. society as an attack on Mom and Apple Pie.

Coincident with their confused belief that they are -- or want to be -- American, they assume that bottom-line U.S. clones, Canwest and Global, are better for Canadians than a publicly owned broadcasting system.

—David Bruce | Vancouver

I thought Heather Mallick's January 15 column was entertaining and illuminating. For her critics, especially the one who referred to Mr. Harper's administration as "forward-thinking," my response is simply that the taxpayer money spent on the CBC also enabled someone to read your opinions, no matter how wrong-headed, so that must be money well spent.

—Anthony Glassman | Cleveland, Ohio, USA

Interesting that a column on over-reacting should immediately produce two violent over-reactions.

Shutting down the CBC to prevent Heather Mallick from airing her views...? Why, that would almost be like manhandling jaywalkers and throwing them in the clink! I can hardly imagine better evidence than this for Mallick's main argumentative claim.

—Hilary Turner | Abbotsford, B.C.

I always enjoy the venom that Ms. Mallick reserves for those who are of the comfortable class and don't realize it.

I think that she is accurate in this connection between the excessive force used by police on average people and the excessive force used by the US government around the world. Good work.

—Darren Worrall | Toronto

Does Ms. Mallick gets paid for this sort of drivel? Perhaps she should go back to complaining about Toronto dog owners. She knows much more about them.

It seems to me that at this time last year a large portion of the the worlds population was threatening death, destruction and eternal damnation on the country of Denmark on the basis of the publication of a series of cartoons. But as that didn't involve Americans I suppose it was a restrained and reasoned response in Ms. Mallicks opinion.

What happened to the unfortunate Don was is not exactly typical but I'm sure that there are stories of foreign tourists finding themselves in equally awkward situations in Canada.

I have the feeling that in Ms. Mallicks eyes the Americans will never do anything right. If she is looking for action and they exercise caution she'll accuse them of being lazy and complacent. When they do act on what they see as a threat to their interests she'll call them violent and overbearing. Maybe she should just give up as she'll never be happy.

By the way, a "jerkin" is an english word for a type of short jacket, not body armour.

—John Corkery | Calgary

Seriously - our tax dollars contribute towards Heather Mallick's reports on her perusal of YouTube comments and her impending furniture delivery. And the CBC tries to pass this off as "news?" I've never seen anything so self-indulgent and useless. What a waste of print space.

This is a real low for Canadian "journalism."

—J. Vansley | Toronto

Heather Mallick's comments on the history professor in Atlanta are in keeping with the cosmopolitan, urbane Canadians' opinion of the lawless United States. As usual, they bear little resemblance to the actual event.

—Gil Gibson | Burke, VA USA

Oh, pish posh, I say to the readers whose comments you have posted. Please, Heather Mallick, please continue to "waste" my tax dollars producing such intelligent, wry, interesing and well-informed commentary.

In fact, CBC, please advocate to increase my personal income tax by 0.5% so that you can afford to hire more such talented women (and men) to fill the airwaves and the internet with content that actually dares to incite original thought, and counteract the FOX network-type drivel that dribbles across the televisions and threatens to reduce our brains to quivering, reactionary jelly.

—Lisa MacLeod | Vancouver

I was somewhat distressed by the commentary on Heather Mallek's article about America's over reaction. I thought the article amusing, and well written.

I am sorry that some people didn't, and think possibly their over reaction mirrors that of the American police. The CBC is ours, and I for one hope it continues to bring an alternate, uniquely Canadian view, agree or disagree as we may.

—Liz McQuarrie | Regina

I have never read such garbage as the article By Heather Mallick! She is one of the reasons so many people are sick and tired of supporting the uneeded CBC!

As a taxpayer I am sick and tired of paying the millions of dollars daily that the CBC spends on such useless drivel.

My hope is that Stephen Harper and his forward thinking government will close down the CBC as it is not needed, with CTV ,Global, City TV and the many TV stations that do not bleed the country with their Liberal sponsored garbage!

Let's save our tax dollars and make people like her earn her way to a living!

—Dick Chapman | Guelph Ont.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]