Comments on: Open Thread for July 10, 2009

By: Matthew Wrather

Matthew Wrather — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 04:24:42 +0000

Nah, man — as Stokes has said elsewhere, this is a “safe space” for nitpicking. You can’t please all the people all the time; etc., and we’re just glad you like SOMETHING on the site. Keep listening!

(Though I have to admit, “undergrad-y vibe” rankles a little bit. I mean, come on. We have a Harvard professor on staff.)

By: Lucas

Lucas — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:21:32 +0000

I just listened to the latest podcast, and I heard ‘pedantic and badly written’ quoted. I’m not sure why, but it just made me feel shocked, and then really bad. It’s probably because I was douchey, and I realized it. Sorry guys. Keep up the good work. P.S. – Fenzel, I just read the super bible smash bros thing, and I really liked that. Humorous, clever, etc. Good job.

By: Lucas

Lucas — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 20:55:11 +0000

Thanks for the really detailed response Fenzel. Several of those points were things I hadn’t really thought about. Stokes and Wrather, I realize that I probably came across a little more hostile than I meant to; I didn’t mean that all the articles are written poorly. I thought Fenzel’s point about ya’ll being more involved in the performing arts (improv, etc.) was a good one (also good – the fact that you all have much experience interacting with each other). And yeah, I recognize that the point of the site is to be nuanced about things that don’t deserve such overly detailed critiques, but I think there are ways of going about it that don’t seem pedantic. I sometimes feel like I am reading an essay by an undergrad, wherein they attempt to apply their most recent academic interest (whether sociology or lit crit) to their most recent pop cultural interest. I can remember an article I read quite a while back that tried to use foucault to critique something, and that unlearned name dropping kind of undergrad-y vibe really hit me.
In fact maybe that’s why I don’t enjoy the site as much as the podcast: in the podcast, I accept that certain things are only going to be touched upon and then only at a surface level. Whereas on the site, I’d like to read something that is less name drop-y with the theories and the figures of importance, and more actual indepth engagement. So yes I agree with Fenzel’s last point that sometimes the articles can be a overly didactic, but the ‘teaching’ that occurs sometimes seems the come out of the cultural theory 101.

Also I think the overly formal nature of the articles is a problem. I don’t like to read academic writers that are overly formal, so why would I want to read that on my off time? Nietzsche, Foucault, Derrida, Heidegger (sometimes), Merleau-Ponty, etc. are all good examples of engaging writers (from my field) who still pack an intellectual punch. I realize that not everyone can reach their level (I certainly can’t), but I think they provide a better model to try to imitate than, say, Kant, Russel, Husserl, etc.

I recognize that it is difficult to put out really stellar articles every day of the week. I don’t want to diminish what your site does, as I think it is a really fun and interesting. Please don’t take offense at anything I have said, because I really do enjoy (some, if not all) of what you do.

By: LA

LA — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 02:05:32 +0000

Re: Michael Jackson Memorial.

The LA police are used to large events. Just the week before was the huge Lakers extravaganza. The government agencies are not there to promote or assist in any of the events. They are there to protect the people and ensure health and safety. They are visible for any protest march, funeral processions, and even Circus parades. Does it cost the city? Sure, but it is a function of a large city. Does the city benefit? Sometimes they do through taxes from hotels, restaurants, etc…. Having lived in the area I appreciate the amazing job that they do in maintaining order. Having been at protest attended mainly by locals, I am thankful for the security even though it does add to my taxes. A city without control would result in ruin.

By: Matthew Belinkie

Matthew Belinkie — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 14:52:43 +0000

Me write bad? That’s unpossible!

By: Matthew Wrather

Matthew Wrather — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 01:23:31 +0000

@stokes

Then again, it could be the bad writing.

By: mlawski

mlawski — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 21:54:15 +0000

Thanks so much to all the Lost fans who gave me topics for this week. I’m shutting down the suggestion box now so I can finish up the post. If you have any other Lost-related questions or themes, put them in your comments tomorrow when the post is published, and I’ll answer them in the coming weeks. Gracias!

By: Eric

Eric — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 20:46:55 +0000

LOST theme:
Fate vs. Free will. Probably the main theme of the show. For season 2, you can talk about the theme as it relates to the button.

By: stokes

stokes — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 15:47:18 +0000

@Lucas: I think it’s probably the pedantry.

By: fenzel

fenzel — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 15:14:06 +0000

Oh, also, a lot of us have sarcastic, snarky senses of humor that can come off as endearing in recordings and just plain mean or angry in articles. I know I tend to go on tears when I write that read as more hostile and less good-natured than they are meant to be at the time. This, more than anything else, is just about improving my command of my writing and finding my voice with greater sure-footedness.

Ditching awful mixed metaphors like that might be a good start ;)