Slog
News & ArtsMonday, September 27, 2010
Housekeeping / Books Gawker Doesn't Get It: Part 167
Posted by Paul Constant on Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 3:28 PM
This past week Gawker called out those “rain-soaked latte zombies” in Seattle for their cover story on Lin, by Lin, and in doing so managed to step in a big squishy irony turd, which is gonna be tough to get out of those point-toed goth shoes you New York vamps always wear.
...
What leaves Sacramento so bewildered — and here I speak for my re-adopted hometown of Manure-Huffing Coke Zero Werewolves the same way Gawker seems to speak for the Big Apple whenever suckerpunching Seattle — is that this is apparently now a grudge match. I don’t know where the irony starts and where it ends.
This much is absolutely true: Tao Lin's feature has inspired so much bloggy fun.
1
I know The Stranger is taking glee in all the blathering, but the truth of the matter was shown out in the NYTimes Book Review on Sunday:
"In place of narrative momentum and escalating complexity, the book offers passiveness and anomie. In attempting to explore boredom, Lin Recreates boredom. In attempting to write about obsession, he embraces narcissism. If this was his goal, mission accomplished. But the achievement is a low-hanging fruit, and its rewards are limited. By the time I reached the last 50 pages, each time the characters said they wanted to kill themselves, I knew exactly how they felt."
Ouch. If your asking me I'd say you put too many eggs in the Tao Lin basket (or... hamsters?). But that's seems to be the way when you guys let your friends write for the paper.
"In place of narrative momentum and escalating complexity, the book offers passiveness and anomie. In attempting to explore boredom, Lin Recreates boredom. In attempting to write about obsession, he embraces narcissism. If this was his goal, mission accomplished. But the achievement is a low-hanging fruit, and its rewards are limited. By the time I reached the last 50 pages, each time the characters said they wanted to kill themselves, I knew exactly how they felt."
Ouch. If your asking me I'd say you put too many eggs in the Tao Lin basket (or... hamsters?). But that's seems to be the way when you guys let your friends write for the paper.
2
Never forget, when it comes to zombies, Fremont is not just the Center of the Universe, it's the Zombie Capitol of the World (as certified by Guinness World Records).
We know zombies. Tao seems to think he can mock our zombie credentials, but we just look at him and think "Brains".
We know zombies. Tao seems to think he can mock our zombie credentials, but we just look at him and think "Brains".
3
I don't totally get it. So, Time ran a cover piece on this dude saying he's the best, and The Stranger was all "no way, that dude kinda sucks", so The Stranger mocked it with their own cover featuring a local author they totally like. Then Gawker—does Gawker usually comment on literary matters?—started up with the provincial insults (again!), and ya'll are running with it 'cause, like, you know, they're bigtime, er... somethingrathers, and you got their attention.
Am I close?
Am I close?
5
@3: It isn't just that Time did the story, it's the fawning and nonsensical way it was written. This piece illustrates it well.
7
Hate to squash the beef, but Gawker's Richard Lawson (the one who wrote the Stranger-bashing post) admitted that his Gawker post was a joke. Check the comments section.
9
It was so painfully obvious that Richard Lawson's Gawker piece was a joke that I can only hope that this is Paul's attempt at generating some sort of Internet crippling meta-ironic performance piece.
Although, let's remember that it doesn't really count as "blog battle" if only one side's fighting it and that there are only losers in Internet fights.
Although, let's remember that it doesn't really count as "blog battle" if only one side's fighting it and that there are only losers in Internet fights.
10
Whatever. Tao Lin is annoying, and Gawker is just superficial pap. And I do mean "pap" not "pulp".
11
What's really incredible is that this has been going on since last week, I didn't know who the fuck Tao Lin was before it started, and now that I know I don't fucking give a shit.
But the blogerati are waving their indie cred dicks around about it for over a week. Damn.
But the blogerati are waving their indie cred dicks around about it for over a week. Damn.
12
@5 - Thanks. I wasn't even aware of the tone of the original piece. Yet somehow, my only takeaway from all this is that bloggers are really in love with the blogosphere, which I guess makes sense.
13
@12: Yeah, it's been a circle-jerk for a long time now. I think the only people that read Gawker nowadays are other in-crowd bloggers.
15
This is vying for Least Interesting Topic Ever on Slog, right up there with Charles' 700 part series on Amanda Knox, the two month long Avatar hypefest and the "French intern" thing.
Adults don't read Time and I would never have heard of Gawker if it wasn't for it getting mentioned on Slog all the time.
Adults don't read Time and I would never have heard of Gawker if it wasn't for it getting mentioned on Slog all the time.
16
I know it's cute to say "no one reads Gawker" or "I haven't heard of them", but their network traffic suggests otherwise. http://www.theawl.com/2010/09/gawker-med…
17
I guess you can declare victory if you can convince anyone to think they have to say that Tao Lin's writing doesn't suck donkey dicks lest they appear to not "get it".
The NYT book review is an example of the many book critics who to indeed "get" what Tao Lin is playing at and they judge the result to be utter crap.
The NYT book review is an example of the many book critics who to indeed "get" what Tao Lin is playing at and they judge the result to be utter crap.
19
I don't care if gawker gets it or not; I just wish they'd find another frame I'd reference for their insults than "Singles." It's not like I hate N.Y. JUST because everyone there is a twelve year old in the body of Tom Hanks playing a giant piano with their feet...
21
Geez, Paul, do you even get Gawker? It takes nothing seriously, and every post is designed to amuse and/or piss someone off -- hopefully both.
So no, it isn't that Gawker doesn't "get it." It's that once again you don't get it -- and in the process looking like a fucking tool.
So no, it isn't that Gawker doesn't "get it." It's that once again you don't get it -- and in the process looking like a fucking tool.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Outside the Gay Bar by Dan Savage
-
Lunchtime Quickie: Cyclist vs Car by Kelly O
-
Sunday Morning News by Riya Bhattacharjee
-
SL Letter of the Day: Lying Liars by Dan Savage
-
Slog Bible Study: Exodus 32:24-29 by Goldy
-
Conservative GOP Arizona Sheriff—and Mitt Romney AZ Campaign Co-Chair—Pledges to Deport Illegal Immigrants by Dan Savage
-
What Did an ESPN Blogger call the Asian American Baller Lin? by Charles Mudede
-
Walmart Tries to Pay Workers in Walmart Vouchers by Paul Constant
-
Why I'm Suing Attorney James Egan by Pete Holmes
-
Pharmacy Can Refuse Women Emergency Contraceptives, Judge Rules by Cienna Madrid
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (22) RSS