THE DISPATCH: READER MAIL
Gather ‘round readers, for I am about to do something I’ve never done before: publicly apologize on behalf of an article I wrote. That’s right, I’m popping my apology cherry. Been a long time coming too; this site’s been alive almost three years and I haven’t yet had to say sorry for anything I’ve written – which actually isn’t as impressive as it sounds, considering I write harmless fluff that’s usually read by about a dozen people. And most of them are family members. But the streak is about to come to an end. Today I am making a formal apology to John Walston, proprietor of Buzzwhack.com. As you may recall, I recently wrote a short piece ripping Buzzwhack for taking a swipe at bloggers, a swipe I felt was unnecessary and unfair. I concluded the article by claiming that Buzzwhack has "crossed the line to absolute irrelevance.”
One mouse-click proved that, sure enough, Walston was correct. Not only was the definition not created by Buzzwhack, but the guy who did come up with it is a blogger himself. So, I was mistaken. And I sincerely apologize. Really, I do. Nevertheless, I’m still sticking to my original distaste for the definition (even in jest), and Buzzwhack’s choice to use it for their Word of the Day. For Buzzwhack to promote the definition without clarifying its jokey undertone only further served to perpetuate the myth of blogging-as-a-fad. And I think celebrating the myth is a bratty, archaic stance to take on an influential medium that isn’t going away anytime soon. And as for Kawasaki, well, the only thing he did wrong was create a definition of blogger that’s simply not funny. While that’s not a sin, being unfunny isn’t exactly the greatest quality. Believe me. I spend most of my waking hours being unfunny, and it sucks. But again, apologies for incorrectly blaming Buzzwhack. If it makes you feel any better, Mr. Walston, no one reads this stupid site anyway.
Dear B., I also noted the rosters of other participating countries, including Italy's featuring big leaguers David Dellucci and Mike Piazza. Just because these guys have Italian heritage qualifies them to compete? A-Rod's wavering between playing for the U.S. or the Dominican Republic is also a joke. He, like Piazza and Delucci, has never lived anywhere but the U.S. but can compete for a country from which his family originated? My mom's 100% Irish, but the closest I've ever been to Ireland is Kieran's Pub for a pint before slinking into Sheik's - does that mean I could represent Ireland in international competition in some sport? Scott C. Scott, I think you’re missing the big picture here, failing to see the forest for the trees (or is it trees for the forest? I don’t know nature.). By creating an international baseball competition we will finally receive a definitive answer to the age-old and oft-raised question of the superior baseball country. I know I’m not the only one who has devoted hours upon hours in starry-eyed wonderment as to which country’s athletes would prove victorious in a winner-take-all baseball competition. Does the US of A reign supreme, or will the feisty stickballers from the Dominican overtake their silver-spooned competitors from the North? Is Canada as pathetic as we think? Will the Italian team wear white overalls as their uniforms, a la Super Mario? At last, we will have our answers. I could not be more excited. I kid. Truth is I really don’t give a shit, mostly due to your what-country-should-this-guy-represent complaint. If the US doesn’t win, we’ll be subjected to endless bitching over the defected US-born players. Blah. I’m hoping Piazza gets plunked in the face and has to sit out the entire year, for two main reasons: (1) the Powers That Be will think twice before disrupting spring training and compromising the MLB season with a pointless “tournament” (aka marketing gimmick) again, and (2) aging d-bag Piazza is a prime sacrificial lamb. Furthermore (hastily climbing upon my soapbox), if I have this straight, the World Baseball Classic is an exhibition with temporary rosters, no competitive history and a lower quality of play than the MLB. Gee, where do I sign?! Honestly, I don’t even know if I’m going to watch. *** Yo B.- Dear reader, You make a stellar point. Maybe I’ll start encouraging my fashion-challenged pals to keep fighting the good fight in their dated threads. “Hey, is that a Member’s Only jacket? Damn I wish I could pull that off, pardner.” Or “I really love this whole tapered-jean, oversized-henley look you’ve got going on. The gold hoop earring really brings the look full-circle. Totally classic. Don’t stop doing what you’re doing.” It’s a dog-eat-dog world out there, and if I can get a leg-warmer up on the competition simply due to my wardrobe choices, maybe I should just keep my mouth shut. Color me corrected.
Dear B., I really enjoyed your candid interview with Twins farmhand Pat Neshek. I heard he's made the Twins' 40-man roster - can you give us an update? Will he be in big-league camp this spring? Scott C. Scott, if you're interested in general updates/information about Neshek you should be sure to check his website (the link is located on my Sites page). In response to your particular query I sent Pat an email. He responded with:
I hope that answers your question. It's been a helluva lot of fun keeping in touch with Neshek over the years. Ten years ago we were hanging out at his house every weekend, quoting Billy Madison lines, playing Sim City and sneaking onto the nearby golf course late at night to search for golf balls that we'd clean and sell for fifty cents apiece. These days he's hobnobbing with hall-of-famers and signing autographs at TwinsFest. My jealousy has hit an all-time high.
B, It seems that you spent a lot of time deciding which side of the "Crash" fence you wanted to end up on. Since reviews are painful to read, I scanned your piece and picked out the words; hated, 3 times, Crash and fence. That was all I needed. I guess my questions for you are, have you ever decided it is not worth the effort to decide which side of the fence you are on? Or is part of the "feel my pop culture heat" mantra being prepared to debate the merits of a second-rate movie? Being a content fence-sitter (you go numb after a while), I am curious. Thanks. First off, I mostly agree with you about reviews. When I started this website I’d planned to devote most of its content to reviewing various media, but quickly soured on the idea. Reviews are barely fun to write and even less fun to read, for two reasons: most are pretentious and too long. They seem to serve only as an outlet to confirm the supposedly unparalleled intellect of the reviewer. Because of this, I recently decided to cap my reviews at 300 words and avoid pretension and unnecessary snark. My goal is to be short on flair but long on function. That I’m not talented enough to write with one bit of flair is just a happy accident. However, no matter how worthless most reviews are, I still respect the concept. Reviews spark debate, which fosters critical thinking. Critical thinking leads to knowledge; therefore reviews are imperative to progressive thought. That said, my article on Crash was not a review. It was a commentary on the film and our culture, and my point was that Crash was a destructive, lazy, inaccurate portrayal of our society. Not that it was “bad” or “good,” because I fully acknowledged the film’s upside. So to fully answer your question: yes, there are many times when I decide that a review is not worth the effort. I don’t review even half of the media I consume. But I’ve argued with numerous people over the merits of Crash, so I finally decided to transfer my arguments to print. I still haven’t heard a worthy rationale in defense of the film. Therefore, I have no choice but to conclude that I’m a genius.
Regular readers of this website will know how often I ask for (nay, beg for) reader mail. Love it. However, what one reader wrote me last Thursday was not exactly what I had in mind. He simply wrote, "You are a fucking moron." That's it. And while I certainly don't mind being called a moron -- that's pretty much a daily occurence -- I'd prefer a little more clarification in the future. But when I wrote "Jay" back with the email address he included on my contact form, it was -- surprise! -- inactive. A fake email address; god I love the internet. So, to clarify: reader mail, good; calling me a fucking moron, fine; not giving a reason, sad.
Reader Stephanie F. responded to my recent Query of the Week "I wonder if pro-lifers think it's okay for pregnant women to use the car pool lane" with: "I think that the answer is NO. If you are a cop, you look for two BODIES in the car when ticketing for carpool cheaters. A lot of people put dummies in their passenger seats when driving so that they can cheat the system, so I think that being pregnant will be a tough argument when pulled over. Also, the point of the carpool lane is to reduce the number of DRIVERS on the road...newborns have 16+ years to mature before they will even be able to drive. And last but not least, children ages 11 and under are required to ride in the backseat of cars, so in essence, being pregnant means that your child is in the front seat. And if you consider your unborn baby a real child, then you are doing something illegal by having them in the front seat." I responded to Stephanie with, "You do understand I was joking, right?" To which she responded with, "oh." Stephanie's a real life Amelia Bedelia! Stephanie's the best.
B, If not, you do not have a leg to stand on. Taking quotes out of context is an easy way to win an argument against the ignorant. I made that quote up. -- Wouldn’t You Like To Know
Dear Wouldn’t You Like To Know, Barry Bonds tried to insinuate that the reporters questioning his steroid use were ignoring the Hurricane. What a dick. These reporters were attempting to do their job by asking Barry if he has used performance-enhancing substances, and Jughead belittled the reporters by questioning their priorities. You pointed out that baseball is Barry’s job; isn’t it the writers’ job to ask Barry questions? Did any of these writers claim that steroids were more important than Katrina? No. Bonds was immaturely creating an argument in an attempt to get the heat off himself. He has made many an asinine statement in his days, but this had to rank near the top. (Let’s take Bonds’ logic and apply it to another situation. Imagine if a teacher caught a student cheating on a test and the student defended himself by saying, “There are more important things in life than me cheating on this test. Why don’t you focus your attention on helping the victims of Hurricane Katrina?” Not only would that student be unfairly assuming that the teacher was ignoring Katrina, but he would be skirting the issue at hand.) The importance of helping the Katrina victims has never been in question. Neither has the importance of donating money. For Barry Bonds to question the priorities of the reporters who were simply doing their job was a cheap cop-out, and for that he is an ass. w/b -- B PS. I have no idea how to calculate what Bonds would have to give in order to meet my sad little donation amount. I earn less than 1/500th of his salary, so I’m guessing he’s got a bit more disposable income than I do. I gave what I could, and I hope he did as well. Doesn’t matter though, he’s still an ass.
Hey B, Secondly when are you going to admit Kanye West is an IDIOT??? -- Anonymous I'm not sure what to think about this one. Have I been prank e-mailed? I'm beginning to hate the form on my contact page, which allows readers to send me an e-mail without leaving their name or contact information. Damn you, Anonymous, show your face! The first question seemed to be an attempt to make fun of my Completely Random Recommendations piece in which I mentioned my beloved Uniball Signo 207 pens. Okay, I'm a nerd. I get it. Thanks for pointing that out. But mentioning that you use the G2? Good lord. I've been accused of "chicken scratch" writing myself (a problem haunting me since my youth), and the G2 pens are the absolute worst for small handwriting. The micro tip 207 pens have been a godsend. Give these a try, my friend. Trust me. To answer your second question, I will never admit that Kanye is an idiot. Why would I? His first two albums have easily surpassed anything else in the hip-hop genre, (especially his latest "Late Registration") with the exception of Outkast. He's achieved the all-important critical acclaim and commercial success. His MC skills aren't groundbreaking by any means, but at least he chooses to rap about more than just money and hoes. So that's something. And not only that, but Kanye produced two of my favorite recent hip-hop albums: John Legend's "Get Lifted" and Common's "Be." I'm not saying he's attained legendary status yet, but he's on his way. So he's arrogant and whines when he doesn't win awards. At least he cares. Muhammed Ali was even more arrogant, but he's one of the most loved and celebrated figures in recent American history. So we're supposed to love Ali but hate Kanye? Whatever. Hugs and kisses,
the Dispatch: reader mail
the Dispatch: reader mail
|
:: THE LATEST :: :: RUNNING FEATURES :: ----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- :: SPONSOR ::
|
In response, I recently received this e-mail from Mr. Walston: “loved your comments about my definition for "blogger," but note that it's really Guy Kawasaki's definition, the noted Internet guru and blogger, not mine. in fact, he runs those words at the top of his blog.... home | film | tunes | sports | tube | pages | sites | ideas | etc | open mic | store