tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post6075252579977376263..comments2023-09-12T07:49:48.362-04:00Comments on Restricted View: You won't see meMolliehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12350892542573842455noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-80927825000148587422007-06-30T17:02:00.000-04:002007-06-30T17:02:00.000-04:00A couple of observations on this amusing thread (d...A couple of observations on this amusing thread (discovered belatedly via the Huffington Post):<BR/><BR/>-As others have noted, Colapinto does make an ass of himself and handily confutes his own dismissal of the blogosphere. And note that the New Yorker itself has now launched a blog by George Packer (his posts still read like NY'er articles, but anyway...).<BR/><BR/>-It should be no surprise byAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-41454616258593037662007-06-24T23:22:00.000-04:002007-06-24T23:22:00.000-04:00I love your theory, Marla! And I never did learn e...I love your theory, Marla! And I never did learn exactly how Mr. Colapinto found his way here... but I think I know who that other "john" was. Still, I prefer your version. And thanks for all your other thoughts as well -- I'd be happy to see this conversation keep going; there's certainly plenty of ground to cover!Molliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12350892542573842455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-88371941289034818342007-06-24T15:58:00.000-04:002007-06-24T15:58:00.000-04:00I know I'm a lot late to the commenting here, but ...I know I'm a lot late to the commenting here, but upon reading your blog this weekend, I noticed that a "john" responded to your post asking what your readers' guilty pleasures are. (This "john" posted a fondness for the Goo Goo Dolls' "Slide," which, I must say, is one of my favorite songs as well.) I think an excellent spin to this whole thing would be if John Colapinto had been a longtime Marlahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00253180319845310981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-76765852697661921852007-06-13T12:22:00.000-04:002007-06-13T12:22:00.000-04:00I read that article in the New Yorker and didn't c...I read that article in the New Yorker and didn't care for it either. BTW, came here via Amazon's blog.Tallyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17461108991051016395noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-6113358290178766842007-06-11T21:52:00.000-04:002007-06-11T21:52:00.000-04:00"And that's why you're a blogger and not a writer...."And that's why you're a blogger and not a writer."<BR/><BR/>Wow. I mean, just . . . wow. There's a pretty good chance, that someday you'll be a "blogger" and Mollie will be a "writer" (I mean, according to your definitions). What, then?<BR/><BR/>By the way, I enjoyed the piece. Which isn't to say it couldn't have been better.robneyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04200448864055344321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-88518329974546442932007-06-11T13:25:00.000-04:002007-06-11T13:25:00.000-04:00Actually, it's *Ms.* Anonymous. :-)But thanks for...Actually, it's *Ms.* Anonymous. :-)<BR/><BR/>But thanks for being gracious.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-74907063720095572592007-06-11T11:09:00.000-04:002007-06-11T11:09:00.000-04:00No need to apologize, Mr. Anonymous! I don't get o...No need to apologize, Mr. Anonymous! I don't get offended by people tagging GQ as a "mere" fashion/celeb book. Fashion *is* our bread and butter, after all, and we're often as guilty as any other glossy of ass-kissing celeb coverage. Then again, GQ has rightesouly whacked not just a few cover subjects in its history. Just the tip of the iceberg: Alan Richman--who, it's fairly uncontroversial to Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-37878051121751016722007-06-09T18:25:00.000-04:002007-06-09T18:25:00.000-04:00Hi Liverboy,Just wanted to apologize for unfairly ...Hi Liverboy,<BR/><BR/>Just wanted to apologize for unfairly maligning GQ -- it was a snap reference intended as a proxy, but given that I haven't picked up an issue in some time, obviously an uninformed one. But you've inspired me to take another look.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-14316939928732451572007-06-09T17:07:00.000-04:002007-06-09T17:07:00.000-04:00Thanks, Liverboy! You won't find me dismissing GQ ...Thanks, Liverboy! You won't find me dismissing <I>GQ</I> out of hand, for exactly the reasons you mention. Like you, I think it's good when a piece has a take on its subject -- even if I disagree with the author's POV (give me 10,000 words on how, after spending a week in his company, you came to the conclusion that Paul McCartney is actually from Mars; if the writing is solid I'll read it Molliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12350892542573842455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-59790584304196892682007-06-09T16:48:00.000-04:002007-06-09T16:48:00.000-04:00I was struck by the post which included the point-...I was struck by the post which included the point-on assessment that "The article lacks a true narrative arc -- a sense that the writer, having accumulated all this raw material, has transformed it into a *story...*" True dat. Such neutral, even sterile writing throughout that McCartney piece. How strange that, as another poster noted, the profile could be littered with needless first-person Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-14403413084489125412007-06-09T16:37:00.000-04:002007-06-09T16:37:00.000-04:00Kinda serendipitous that the guy's name ends in "p...Kinda serendipitous that the guy's name ends in "pinto"--give him a teensy little smack on the behind and he explodes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-73585970615453666392007-06-09T15:51:00.000-04:002007-06-09T15:51:00.000-04:00I read the article too and thought it was dull but...I read the article too and thought it was dull but enjoyed what insight it provided into Paul McCartney's life.<BR/><BR/>But I'm enjoying John's hardcore meltdown over honest criticism even more.<BR/><BR/>And Mollie, you are writer!<BR/><BR/>Don't listen to the all important I write for the New Yorker guy.MartiniCocoahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12509335664000215080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-71653009157139849732007-06-09T13:01:00.000-04:002007-06-09T13:01:00.000-04:00It's hard for me to look at the exchange and think...It's hard for me to look at the exchange and think of the emergence of Punk Rock and how it relates to the "Blogosphere". Old media types sniping against the blog-based upstarts, criticizing them because anybody (including me) can blog to their hearts content. Insight is insight regardless of who gives it. If real humor or intelligence is delivered through the push button publishing of blogs(Your Pal Petehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03534429380899993383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-42154337549890752482007-06-09T13:00:00.000-04:002007-06-09T13:00:00.000-04:00John, here's the thing.Read Mollie's post again. S...John, here's the thing.<BR/><BR/>Read Mollie's post again. See how she is commenting on, and criticising, your article. Her focus is on this particular piece of writing, not you as a person. That's why she keeps using 'the story' or 'the article' or 'the piece' or 'it' as constructions:<BR/><BR/><B>the story contains a few interesting revelation...for the most part it is dull, shapeless and Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-56496915068304416272007-06-08T22:22:00.000-04:002007-06-08T22:22:00.000-04:00Yes, yes, John's piece is a feature article, not a...Yes, yes, John's piece is a feature article, not a piece of criticism. We get that. <BR/><BR/>And yet, don't Malcolm Gladwell's features *frequently* try to establish a paradigm or at least, boil down many disparate pieces of information into a few central questions? <BR/><BR/>Adam Gopnik's writings on Paris (also feature articles when they first appeared) also showcase both the reporting of Katehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09313738786459612583noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-63033368511743693372007-06-08T19:48:00.000-04:002007-06-08T19:48:00.000-04:00I'm not entirely sure why John would feel the need...I'm not entirely sure why John would feel the need to respond to your criticism, which you are more than entitled to, in such an overtly aggressive way. Anyhow, I just wanted to add that there is little in celebrity-interview articles that is more hideous than a writer inserting themselves into the article to indicate how close writer and subject are, and what fascinating insights the writer has Little Miss Nomadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01754601845915573650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-31098041222609121822007-06-08T18:03:00.000-04:002007-06-08T18:03:00.000-04:00I'm going to bet that this John is actually Ashton...I'm going to bet that this John is actually Ashton Kutcher, and you have somehow been wanly PUnk'D<BR/><BR/>Although I have to say, hearing Paul McCartney tell fart jokes is about ten times more interesting a premise than any of the ones described here.<BR/><BR/>Q: What do you call a dog with wings?<BR/>A: Linda McCartney<BR/><BR/>sorry.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-34456974327682136692007-06-08T14:12:00.000-04:002007-06-08T14:12:00.000-04:00The McCartney article had been on my to-read pile ...The McCartney article had been on my to-read pile until this exchange. Now, having read it, I daresay Mollie is right. The article lacks a true narrative arc -- a sense that the writer, having accumulated all this raw material, has transformed it into a *story*, the kind of thing that makes a profile in the New Yorker different from an interview in GQ. Rather, it reads more like a transcript Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-28122785380047861282007-06-08T12:37:00.000-04:002007-06-08T12:37:00.000-04:00I think "John" is undermining his own arguments he...I think "John" is undermining his own arguments here... if bloggers aren't "real" writers, and beneath consideration, then why has he spent so much time here firing off churlish responses? Based on the Huffington blog post, I don't think it will have paid off in the way that he intended.Amy Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08698744717995300818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-15124613054984715402007-06-08T11:40:00.000-04:002007-06-08T11:40:00.000-04:00Does any one else find it more than ironic that th...Does any one else find it more than ironic that the one dishing out the churlish, ad hominem invective in this fisticuffs is not the blogger, nor one of the web denizens commenting, but the high and mighty New Yorker writer?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-50565919029521347432007-06-08T11:29:00.000-04:002007-06-08T11:29:00.000-04:00"John" doth protest too much, methinks."John" doth protest too much, methinks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-42532979088522942822007-06-08T09:22:00.000-04:002007-06-08T09:22:00.000-04:00See, this is why I love the "blogosphere": You can...See, this is why I love the "blogosphere": You can take a traditional writer's work, politely criticize it, and have that writer respond to your criticism in a manner that is ever so much more fascinating than the original piece in question. <BR/><BR/>Assuming "John" is the same John who wrote the article, it would appear he looks down on bloggers such as Molly from his position on high. One can Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-52719066600636701572007-06-08T06:04:00.000-04:002007-06-08T06:04:00.000-04:00http://www.geocities.com/sunsetstrip/palms/6797/so...http://www.geocities.com/sunsetstrip/palms/6797/songs/yesterday.html<BR/><BR/>"I was packing to leave and Paul asked me if I had a guitar," says Welch. "He'd apparently been working on the lyrics as he drove to Albufeira form the airport at Lisbon. He borrowed my guitar and started playing the song we all now know as 'Yesterday'."<BR/><BR/>http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=82<BR/><BR/>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-81026715428062380002007-06-07T22:16:00.000-04:002007-06-07T22:16:00.000-04:00Rather than bloviate with the rest, let's just say...Rather than bloviate with the rest, let's just say that I would agree that the gist of the McCartney piece wouldn't even make a very good Talk of the Town item. Not only was it an unenlightening and a dull read, but it also seemed to be a squandered opportunity. <BR/>But then, over the past few days, I noticed that McCartney gave interviews and photo ops to several other publications and realizedAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666844792008996035.post-14402589330223886512007-06-07T19:19:00.000-04:002007-06-07T19:19:00.000-04:00http://www.beatlespennylane.com/New_pics2/paul-vis...http://www.beatlespennylane.com/New_pics2/paul-vision-in-grey.jpg<BR/><BR/>http://techhouse.brown.edu/~dmorris/images/pauldogs.jpg<BR/><BR/>Well, at least he admitted it...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com