ONE ZERO ZERO, A MOST WORTHY MILESTONE!

By Edwin Cooney

From the time I was very young, one of my most satisfying goals has been to achieve or obtain the rating of one hundred.

If I got that number on a school exam, I was in “fat city” for at least twenty-four hours. If my body temperature was one hundred, I got the day off from school. Should I possess that many pennies, that whole dollar meant I could purchase one hundred fireballs, twenty “Good and Plenty” candies or even better, twenty packs of baseball cards.

This week marks my one hundredth column since June 16th, 2005 when a gentleman named Dennis Holston from Harlem, New York invited me to contribute a weekly column to his website. Such occasions inevitably encourage most creative types to mark such occasions.

Hence, I’ve decided to mark my one hundredth column by interviewing the author of these columns—specifically—ME. That’s right, I’m going to interview myself. Since I sign these articles “RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, EDWIN COONEY,” I’m going to ask Edwin’s alter ego, Ed Cooney to interview Edwin Cooney. So, here it goes!

Ed: Welcome Edwin! Get as comfortable as you can, because you’re in for a pretty tough grilling! So first, what made you think you had anything particularly interesting to share with a readership?

Edwin: I didn’t really know whether or not I had anything particularly valuable to share with a “readership” as you put it, I only hoped I did. I went to college hoping to become a history teacher, but I didn’t really work hard enough, I suppose, to make that dream come true. Writing about the things I’ve learned about and observed is the closest I’ll ever get to teaching, so when Mr. Holston invited me to write a column for fun, his invitation was irresistible to me. My first column was posted to him on Friday, June 16th, 2005.

Ed: What do you hope to achieve on an ongoing basis as a columnist?

Edwin: I try to have each column achieve at least one of three attributes. Hopefully each column will entertain, inform, or stimulate the reader to create his or her own ideas from what I write.

Ed: I’ve read all of your columns and they don’t seem to be particularly practical. You don’t help people balance their checkbooks, lose weight, or improve their love life. So why should people take their valuable time to read anything you write?

Edwin: That’s a fair question, but it contains a wholly irrelevant word. There’s no should to it. Hopefully people don’t read what I write because they “should.” A lot of the things people should do are unpleasant and burdensome and people often resist those things. I’m not sure I’d write a column if I were required to unless I was committed to a more compelling obligation such as making a living. If I wrote because I was paid to write and because payment for my work kept food in my stomach, clothes on my back and a shelter over my head, my very worthiness to make money that way would come out of my skill, capacity and drive. I don’t write to instruct the reader. Rather, I write to interest and find common ground with the reader.

Ed: Back in 2005 you wrote a column denying the existence of common sense. Weren’t you being a bit picky by asserting that no sensible response is common to everyone?

Edwin: No, Ed, not at all. Pulling one’s hand quickly from a hot stove isn’t common sense, it’s instinctual self-survival. As I said in that column, there is such a thing as good sense, but there’s absolutely no such thing as “common sense” in my opinion. The phrase “common sense” is, it seems to me, primarily used to pressure other people to join the proponent of “common sense” into following that individual’s ideas or conclusions regarding what is good or sensible.

Ed: Yah, but doesn’t everyone possess good sense and if so, doesn’t that confirm the reality of common sense?

Edwin: Not at all. Everyone possesses the capacity for “good sense,” but everyone’s “good sense” is a little different. Some apply tact very well in tense situations. Other people’s “good sense” is shown in an individual’s coolness under pressure or creativity in problem solving. I still assert, Ed, that common sense is more of a manipulative phrase than it is anything approaching a useful human attribute.

Ed: Have you ever written anything you had to retract?

Edwin: Yes, indeed, Ed—big time. Back in September of 2005, I wrote a column I called “The phone call never made”. It was about Richard Nixon’s decision not to call Coretta Scott King during the 1960 presidential campaign when Dr. King was in jail due to a probation violation. It was a good analysis of the then current and now historical aspects of that decision. The only problem with it was that in the first sentence of the original piece I attributed the invention of the telephone to Thomas Edison instead of Alexander Graham Bell. That column definitely had to be rewritten and redistributed. So, it was!

Ed: What would you say has been the column best received by your readership?

Edwin: Oh, probably the column I wrote last year about this time concerning my experience meeting Mr. Daniel Nellis, the “blind man without hands”. Believe me, Ed, Dan Nellis is far more impressive personally than anything I wrote about him.

Ed: Have you ever lost a reader due to a political difference?

Edwin: Twice. And strangely enough, the unhappy reader is a member of my own family. He’s a very proud and intense political Conservative who regards me as being somewhere to the left of former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev as he believes all American liberals are. I lost this gentleman twice: he tried a second time to read me, but my way of looking at things was just too painful for him, I suppose!

Ed: “How many readers do you have and how many of them respond to what you write?”

Edwin: Currently I have about one hundred twelve readers, but only about five of them respond regularly to what I write. My guess is that many of them read what I’ve written well after it has been distributed. People, after all, are busy and, while it’s tempting, I never press anyone to respond to what I write. Possessing some emotional investment in what I write, I’d of course like more feedback, but I consider myself lucky that one hundred and twelve separate souls are willing to even consider reading what I write. Most of my readers have requested to receive my columns, but a few family members simply got included on my earliest list without their permission and they’ve been gracious enough not to request removal from my readership. On the other hand, the only reader I’ve lost up to now is a family member. I suppose there’s some kind of justice in that.

Ed: Identify your greatest weakness and greatest strength as a columnist.

Edwin: My greatest weakness, I’ve been told, is that I sometimes put too much detail in my columns and that detail often obscures the point of what I write. I’ve also been told that my strength is my capacity for a rather unique perspective on many topics.

Ed: Okay Edwin, what do you hope lies ahead for your column?

Edwin: “I’d like to be regarded as perceptive and readable enough as a columnist to be widely syndicated and financially compensated for my work. However, whether or not that ever comes to pass, I intend to keep writing.

Ed: That’s fine, Edwin, keep writing. I’ll keep reading and serving as your conscience.

Edwin: You do that Ed, because next to a great editor, which I already possess in the person of my best friend Roe, a good conscience is what I need most!

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
EDWIN COONEY