« The tee shirts are here! | Main | I think I dated that girl, once... »

Wednesday: [w] No, no, no. It's not you.

Some part of me wishes that everyone would shut up for a week or two.

Oh, don't worry. I don't mean you. I like you. I respect your opinions on the matter, and that other matter, and ... all right, we disagree on that one thing, but it's okay. There are things which we can just let pass by us. We don't have to talk about that. I like you.

I do. I really do. I don't mean you when I say this.

But I really, really wish that everyone else? Would shut right up.

Or, at the very least, I'd just like for them to try harder. For example, yesterday, the first thing I thought as soon as someone mentioned to me that James Doohan had died? "Oh, no. I'm not going to be able to throw a stone without hitting two dozen expressions of Scotty having beamed up for the last time, even though he was more often tasked with running the transporter." And, sure enough, like Superman ascending to the sky from the wheelchair his actor occupied, there we were. The cynical bit of me -- all that was left after these past few months, I'm afraid -- just wanted to start a betting pool for the cliches that will be invoked when other celebrities die. I felt guilty, full of disclaimers, but I also wanted a scorefile.

No, no, not you. I didn't mind when you did it. That's different. Don't worry about it! Besides, I saw yours first.

And it's not like you were doing the whole routine with the bombs. I woke up this morning and put on the radio -- Canadian radio; you know me, I'd rather have news from home -- and they'd bumped The Current again for Special Programming about the Lame Followup Bombing. (And it honestly was the lamest followup bombing. The Penny Arcade-knockoff-with-bad-Mac-Hall-style-colouring comic of folllowup terrorist attacks.) Really, I'd just started getting used to the non-UK papers being all "our post-9/11, post-7/7 world," and random net.users swaggering around and being all, "TEA! The British drink tea, and that makes them robust and Blitztastic!"

No, it's okay; I didn't mind when you posted the lyrics to "London Calling" that night.

Five times.

Without a cut.

Hey, at least you're cutting your Harry Potter spoilers. I hear that's a problem. I probably shouldn't get into the Harry Potter thing, should I? Yeah, I know you were really upset about the thing -- no, the other thing -- no -- oh, I didn't know Lupin the Third was in it. Anyhow. Yeah, I know, you were really upset by that, but I don't think I could bring myself to care now. No, it's all right if you vent to me about Harry's sex life. It's okay. I don't know who any of these people are, but --

Yeah, well, you kind of get used to it when you live somewhere where the new TV season doesn't start until January and everyone assumed you'd seen Buffy come back from the dead already, y'know? And they only just figured out that it's okay to release a movie two weeks later instead of three months, except for where they haven't -- no, I understand how you feel. I really do.

Yeah, go ahead and tell me about the Weasleys. I'm sure it's fascinating. No, don't worry about spoiling me; I'll never read it any -- no, it's okay. You don't have to loan me your copy.

Really.

Yeah, I like Alan Rickman, too. But it'd be nice if I could find something else at the bookstore. I'm just so bored. And kinda run-down, really. Tired.

Yeah, I could read some webcomics.

I guess.

Posted by Wednesday Burns-White at July 21, 2005 4:44 PM

Comments

Comment from: Christopher B. Wright posted at July 21, 2005 4:54 PM

WEDNESDAY HATES THE CLASH!

C'mon. You knew someone was going to say it. I was just getting it out of the way...

Comment from: Tangent posted at July 21, 2005 4:58 PM

I think you need a drink, lass. A nice stiff drink.

For that matter, I think I need a drink as well. Hmm... *looks through the liquor cabinet...*

Comment from: Wednesday posted at July 21, 2005 5:02 PM

I'm all out of booze right now.

If someone could run to the store and get me some Cheetos and a bottle of Blass yellow label, I'd be really grateful.

Well, the Cheetos would probably do. Especially baked ones. I'll go get some wine tomorrow.

Yeah.

Comment from: Kate Sith posted at July 21, 2005 5:08 PM

But it'd be nice if I could find something else at the bookstore. I'm just so bored.

To supply an answer to what may be a rhetorical, uhm, thingy: All in the Timing, by David Ives.

It is the happy. Sometimes, it is the existentially depressing, but many times, it is the happy. It's a book of plays, you see. We've got "Variations on the Death of Trotsky" and a universal gibberish language and a metaphysical Philadelphia and Philip Glass buying a loaf of bread. And a monkey named Kafka. A talking monkey named Kafka.

(My own copy was eaten by the Princeton University postal service when I tried to loan it to a friend by mail. I miss it dearly.)

Comment from: Jin Wicked posted at July 21, 2005 5:11 PM

Mmmmmm........ Alan Rickman.

IF YOU'RE READING THIS, CALL ME!

Comment from: Wednesday posted at July 21, 2005 5:13 PM

Wait a minute. I know someone who's performed in the Phillip Glass bread play.

It's a musical, right? It is that one?

Dude.

Comment from: Kail Panille posted at July 21, 2005 5:22 PM

I'm usually the most fannish person in the room, but there have been instances when friends of mine (or worse, total strangers) have goobered at me about fandoms to which I don't belong (George R.R. Martin, I'm looking in your direction). (Trying to convince them that I'm justified in preaching Buffy, or DnD, or Harry Potter, or Firefly, or Vorkosigan, or whatever while simultaneously maintaining that I really don't want to hear about their pet obsession probably makes me a horrible person.)

Even knowing how annoying that is, I can't imagine layering it with a heaping helping of rl.drama.

But anyway, it's not me, right? So I don't have anything to apologize for.

But sorry anyway.

Comment from: Wednesday posted at July 21, 2005 5:32 PM

VORKOSIGAAAAANNNNNN. ARRRRRRRRRGggghhhhh.

Comment from: J.(Channing)Wells posted at July 21, 2005 5:41 PM

Muahaha! All in the Timing! I once played Don in the Universal Language short. Ding!

Comment from: Kate Sith posted at July 21, 2005 5:51 PM

Wait a minute. I know someone who's performed in the Phillip Glass bread play.

It's a musical, right? It is that one?

Dude.

Yup, that's the one.

Ives'(OH GOD DO I PUT AN 'S' HERE I JUST DON'T KNOW ANYMORE) work

...ahem. The work that Ives does is full of playing with time, structure, and language, and some of his stuff does have a musical tilt to it. There's another one in the book where he takes three dates (same man, same place (a minigolf course), different women at different times) and presents them as a fugue.

So much fun.

Comment from: Kate Sith posted at July 21, 2005 5:52 PM

Ach. "Ives'(etc.etc.) work" should have a strikethough. The tags didn't work.

Comment from: Kate Sith posted at July 21, 2005 5:56 PM

I once played Don in the Universal Language short. Ding!

Oh man! That one's my favorite! I would kill to play Dawn.

Actually, a couple of my friends did it (a somewhat cropped version, of course) as a duo interp for forensics one year. And, in the same category, a friend and I did "The Philadelphia". (I was Mark/Mary. She was Al(ice).)

Man those were good times.

Comment from: Daemonic posted at July 21, 2005 5:57 PM

Well, I'm just glad its not me and all.

It isn't, right?

Comment from: occultatio posted at July 21, 2005 6:20 PM

I once played Don in the Universal Language short. Ding!

Dude, me too! Easily the most fun I've ever had on stage, absaloopdeloop!

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at July 21, 2005 6:40 PM

I know the bread play! But then, I love Philip Glass.

Well, some Philip Glass. I love the Photographer and Songs from Liquid Days and Einstein on the Beach. I'm not so big on 10,000 Airplanes on the Roof or the Voyage or Powaqqatsi.

Comment from: Wednesday posted at July 21, 2005 6:42 PM

Well, that'd explain the iPod, then.

Comment from: SeanH posted at July 21, 2005 7:40 PM

In all fairness, we do drink tea.

Comment from: Wednesday posted at July 21, 2005 7:48 PM

Yes, but it's hardly the beer of the people.

Comment from: John Bankert posted at July 21, 2005 7:48 PM

I'd offer to fetch the booze and snacks, but I'm afraid my car can't drive across the water.

As for cheetos, yeah, baked cheetos rock. Not that I'm eating them anymore. Such things are proscribed from the beach.

Comment from: sleepyjim posted at July 21, 2005 9:29 PM

Yeah, jeez, what's the deal with people paying respect to the dead in unoriginal ways? Haven't they thought about Wednesday White's feelings?

Comment from: Wednesday posted at July 21, 2005 9:31 PM

Not the point.

Comment from: Paul Gadzikowski posted at July 21, 2005 9:41 PM

My tribute to Jimmy Doohan had nothing to do with the transporter.

Comment from: Kendra Kirai posted at July 21, 2005 9:46 PM

The only one I recall seeing was in Melonpool, and that was quite good, I think.

Comment from: Kendra Kirai posted at July 21, 2005 9:47 PM

Oh, heheh, the missing man formation...not bad, but it took me a few moments to catch it. I don't know of many people will.

Comment from: Robert Hutchinson posted at July 21, 2005 9:51 PM

I'm usually the most fannish person in the room, but there have been instances when friends of mine (or worse, total strangers) have goobered at me about fandoms to which I don't belong

Dear God, I couldn't stop doing this in middle school. It's all right--it really is me. No, really. I've grown now, I think.

("Grown now" is damn hard to type correctly on the first runthrough.)

Comment from: MasonK posted at July 21, 2005 10:21 PM

Whew. I'm glad it's not me.

But then, I tend to goob about Harry Potter with other Harry Potter goobs, rather than evangelize, because, well, there's enough evangelists out there in the world. I'm the same with In Nomine, which is a shame, because there aren't enough In Nomine evangelists in the world.

And I didn't know about the Lame Attack until about an hour ago, so I clearly haven't had a chance to talk about that.

As for James Doohan, I'm totally with you. All the transporter jokes went through my head ten seconds after I found out about it, and I knew every single one of them would get old after about half an hour.

So, yeah. Not me. Glad we're clear on this. :)

Comment from: Suzanne posted at July 21, 2005 11:31 PM

If it makes you feel any better, around here it's all Batman Beyond and Firefly, all the time.

The roommate and I have considered investing in ad space on other websites, just to promote Batman Beyond torrents...then again, we've got to find someone who would let us advertise "illegal" things. (Maybe DJ Coffman...?)

Because Harry Potter ain't got nothing on the Serenity.

Comment from: djcoffman posted at July 21, 2005 11:35 PM

_ _ _ _ _ Kills _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.

That is all.

Comment from: B.G.Aesop posted at July 21, 2005 11:41 PM

Am I the only one who never knows (or cares) what Wednesday's talking about?

Comment from: gwalla posted at July 21, 2005 11:54 PM

The work that Ives does is full of playing with time, structure, and language, and some of his stuff does have a musical tilt to it.

When I read that, my thoughts were, "Well yeah, of course it has a musical lilt to it oh wait she doesn't mean Charles."

Comment from: Robert Hutchinson posted at July 22, 2005 12:11 AM

Am I the only one who never knows (or cares) what Wednesday's talking about?

"I Aggro Rhetorical Flamebait" isn't quite as catchy on a T-shirt.

Comment from: larksilver posted at July 22, 2005 12:16 AM

Proof that it's not me:

1) The lame transporter jokes never occured to me. Never. Whether this is a good thing or not, well, depends on your perspective. My hubby says I have an.. odd sense of humor. Granted, the original bit about Superman flying out of his chair when Mr. Reeves died I thought wasn't so much a joke as a "he's free now, can move on his own again," that sort of thing.

2) I think the Lame thing is horrible, not a laughing matter.

3) I like tea. Not Earl Grey, which is probably blasphemy, but tea is the good.

4) I do not preach about my favorite fan thingie, because well.. I've tried to get them to look at websnark and they won't, and only people who play EQ2 are interested in it.

So it ain't me. I can, however, agree with Ms. White that 90% of everybody else? They can be inconsiderate schmucks. Me too.. just not this time. heh

I just read "Spirits in the Wires" by Charles De Lint and enjoyed it immensely. Also, two works of natural fiction (that's what they called it, I swear) by Winifred Elze called "The Changeling Garden" and "Here, Kitty, Kitty." Both of those were somewhat fresh, unlike much of the mainstream stuff out there.

Of course, Ms. White, darlin'... half the time I don't know what you're talking about, so you may find them trite and pedestrian. If so, well, I tried. heh

Comment from: Phil Kahn posted at July 22, 2005 12:22 AM

DJ: I was just thinking to myself "Hmm... this comment thread is going very casually and nice. When's DJ or Will G or someone gonna come by and set the internet on fire?" when I read that.

Nicely done.

Comment from: ANT Link posted at July 22, 2005 12:23 AM

Am I the only one who never knows (or cares) what Wednesday's talking about?

Nope. You are not.

Comment from: miyaa posted at July 22, 2005 1:09 AM

I wouldn't mind if some other book series got to be as insanely talked about as Harry Potter.

I don't know which more repetitive: internet threads or the weekly television schedule of any Ted Turner owned network.

Comment from: Ray Radlein posted at July 22, 2005 4:03 AM

And it honestly was the lamest followup bombing.

Wasn't it, though? If we assume that the two London bombings were the work of AQ & Co., then their attacks on major Western cities have been achieving exponentially less spectacular results since 9/11. I mean, Madrid topped 100, I think; and the first London bombing topped 50; but this one didn't even manage to top zero. It was like the "terorist bombing" of the airport at the start of The Long Dark Tea Time of the Soul (there's the "T" word, again).

At this rate, they'll try to attack Paris next year sometime, and manage only to repair some pot holes in the streets and accidentally kill Osama Bin Laden in far-off Afghanistan for all their efforts.

Comment from: William_G posted at July 22, 2005 5:01 AM

When's DJ or Will G or someone gonna come by and set the internet on fire?

I'd never go off on Weds.

She like Hunter S Thompson in a push-up bra.

Comment from: William_G posted at July 22, 2005 5:03 AM

Okay, time for a new keyboard. I'm dead certain I hit all of the correct keys in that last post...

Comment from: marlowe posted at July 22, 2005 5:21 AM

Weds - Hang in there, okay? I'd send the new squirt-bottles full of Baijiu (fruit-flavored and derived 50% alcohol-by-volume rocket fuel), but I don't think Chinese customs would let them out any more than English customs would let them in. New and better and different books will come out. The hyped-up series (plural) will disappear from everyone's lips soon enough. And there are always going to be folks out there who actually are working on good, original things. And you're one of them. So enjoy the wine. (In my case, I'd recommend getting an Irish coffee, but that's my preference - I'm coffee-starved in this tea country - and I don't know yours.) We've all been there, or somewhere around there.

dj - hehehehehehehehehe. Your very real and very annoying spoiler has almost paid off in all the fake spoilers that, over the last couple days, have been causing my eyes to slam closed reflexively before I realize that "Ron has an owl fetish, and leaves Harry with Hedwig who is actually a Russian animagus rock star transsexual" probably isn't an actual plot detail of the new book. Humor that "shouldn't be funny" for one moral reason or another often ends up being the funniest kind. River being, after all, made of chocolate.

Comment from: 32_footsteps posted at July 22, 2005 9:51 AM

I don't know which more repetitive: internet threads or the weekly television schedule of any Ted Turner owned network.

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but constantly being force-fed the same dumb episodes of Ed, Edd, & Eddy, Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends, and The Life & Times of Juniper Lee, not to mention the fifty millionth replay of the "Robin becomes Slade's apprentice" episodes of Teen Titans, I'd have to go with the latter.

Comment from: Tangent posted at July 22, 2005 9:56 AM

Wait a minute... you mean the owl fetish thing isn't real? But... but... it was in the special edition copy I got off the internet, along with Hermione and Ginny going off into a lesbian love affair after catching Ron and Harry in bed together!

Though when I think of it, having Harry die off and then the title of the seventh book, "Neville Longbottom and Voldemort's Big Mistake" doesn't seem *that* likely to be real.

Rob H.

Comment from: Dave Van Domelen posted at July 22, 2005 1:15 PM

Hunter S Thompson in a push-up bra? Ewwwww. Thanks for the image.

By the way, it's ME. MUAHAHAHA! And I killed __________ too!

Comment from: B.G.Aesop posted at July 22, 2005 2:43 PM

Wow, the computer just froze and ate my post. Whatever. It was the first third of an essay, which I will now attempt to reproduce:

You had me and you lost me:Wednesday White

Let me start off by saying that I love Websnark. Blah blah blah, don't want to type this again, but suffice to say I've been reading for quite a while, don't post very often, but I felt the need.

Wednesday White. How do I begin. When Eric first brought in someone else to do Websnark with him, I was mystified as to his reasons. I still am, to tell the truth. It couldn't be because he feels the need to put out more posts, as he is the most prolific writer I've ever heard of. His explanation snark didn't really explain things, it seemed to be that he considered more than one person doing websnark to be a natural extension. Whatever, I thought. If Eric likes her, I'll probably like her. And I did. Her first snark, if I recall correctly, was about the prevalence of biscuits in Britain versus New England. Interesting. Somewhat funny. Not up to the standard Eric had set, but I doubt anyone else would be either, so it's all good. But then, at least according to my archive search of [weds], in the next 15 snarks by her, a total of four were about webcomics. One wasn't really, it was about the directional buttons in the comic, but we'll count it anyways. One was about the Shortbreads. One was about a webcomics convention. One was actually a webcomic snark. All good, or at least acceptable so far.

Nine were about her.

Nine. Out of 15. and I just chose 15 for simplicity's's's' sake. Let's look at some more. The next is about Jack Chick. Okay, I guess that counts as webcomics. It doesn't even matter, really, since it's funny. Two more about her. Jack Chick again. Three more about her. One about her talking about herself. One complaining that she can't write. You felt the urge to tell us this? Whatever this is:http://www.websnark.com/archives/2005/03/we_were_wonderi.html

Yet another about her. One about For Better or For Worse(not that I can really tell what she's saying). And then, finally, a snark. About the things Eric snarks about, no less! Language! Comics! Interesting things! And then I can't understand anything she writes! I can barely trudge through the article!

And it's particularly frustrating, since the article had such potential. It's about whether people speak realistically in comics, and whether it matters. And I think, What would Eric have written? And I know it would've been better.

And then a snark about Cookie Monster. Whatever, I was interested, and I learned something from it.

And then this: http://www.websnark.com/archives/2005/04/best_iron_man_t.html

This had potential. It did. This...was a snark. But, conversely, it was pointless. Ooh, we get to learn that something's funny! Visually so! Compare that with this: http://www.websnark.com/archives/2005/04/aaaaaaiiiieee.html

Both entirely about visual comedy. The first one even starts with a stroke in its favor since it's about webcomics. But the second is just so much better.

And then this. The epitome of what I consider to be the problem. Here's the link: http://www.websnark.com/archives/2005/04/on_the_snarking.html

If you care to read through the comments, you'll find that the subject of Wednesday was brought up, and about half of the people who discussed her agreed with me, and half disagreed. But look at her posts. She wrote two in the thread. The first reads: "In my defense, I've just eaten corn.

At long last, I know someone who has never, ever seen part two of Boku no Sexual Harassment. And now I may have to spoil that in order to explain why that defense pains me to read it. *shudder*"

I don't think I have to say that I haven't the foggiest as to what she's talking about. Then, later in the thread, someone posted the idea of switching over to a forum, rather than a blog, with Eric or her starting the threads. Her response went as follows: "Augh. Augh augh augh augh forum no. Forum very no. No. No no no no.

No.

No.

Do not make me safeword. Do not make me call override B-1. No.

Also, am Garth, not Muppet. ^^"

I can't even read the rest of her entries. None of them hold me. You can keep writing, Wednesday White. Enjoy yourself when you do so. You can even keep writing for Websnark. But you'll do so without me. You had me, and you lost me.

Comment from: Ardaniel posted at July 22, 2005 3:57 PM

Aesop: So, uh, you don't like Weds's posts because you don't like Weds's posts, and some people agree with you, while others don't.

Did that really require all that verbiage? One sentence, man.

Comment from: wedge posted at July 22, 2005 4:03 PM

You had me, and you lost me.

*waves cheerily* Bye!

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at July 22, 2005 4:24 PM

When Eric first brought in someone else to do Websnark with him, I was mystified as to his reasons. I still am, to tell the truth.

Let me enlighten you, then.

I like her writing.

I like her writing a lot.

The first essay that got me any notice from the webcomics community? Referenced one of hers. She was doing this before me. She was doing this better than me.

We mark the posts she writes specifically because some people might not consider her their cup of tea. At the moment, people who don't consider me their cup of tea just don't come to Websnark. Frankly, I'd like to get to the point that those folks come for Wednesday's stuff and ignore mine.

I loved this essay. I thought it was an entertaining slice of life/style, with a thesis and a point. You didn't. C'est bien.

But as for "You had me and you lost me?" If you're going to ape my phrasing, ape my methods. I never posted my essay to the Megatokyo site, or the It's Walky site, or the GPF site. The reason for that is simple enough: I think it'd be the height of rudeness, and all it could possibly do is spread acrimony. People would stop respecting me if I did stuff like that.

So. I post the essay to my own blog, and then I move on with my life.

Websnark is Eric Burns and Wednesday White. You don't get to lose one of us and keep the other, I'm afraid. So if we've lost you, I hope you enjoyed some things in the past. Cheers.

Comment from: B.G.Aesop posted at July 22, 2005 5:07 PM

I apologize for being rude, and, honestly, I assumed you did post your essays to the sites which they were about, because I've always read them as incredibly well written and useful criticism, which I know all good artists tend to want. So, I'm sorry about that. I also apologize for "aping" your methods. It wasn't really my intent to offend, I'm just really... I don't know how to phrase this, and I already tried, and came off like a jackass. I don't know why the two of you share a site. I can see liking her writing style. I do like your writing style. I just think they're nothing alike and you don't seem to write about similar things, at all consistently.

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at July 22, 2005 5:24 PM

"Aping" isn't an insult. Or at least, I didn't mean it insultingly.

The reason I don't post "They Had Me..." essays to the sites, no matter how good a set of criticism it might or might not be, is because it's essentially impossible to put an essay like that into someone else's home and have it be taken well. It comes across, as I said, as rude, and the people who frequent that site are predominantly the fans of the work in question. They're not the target audience for THMATLM. The people who come here are.

If you want to post this essay on Aesop's Foibles, then power to you. No one over here will say a word against you -- for one thing, it'd hardly be fair to the people we're critical to.

I do want to pull out one other point from your essay, having just reread it: the number of Weds's posts that are about Webcomics.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again -- anyone who comes here and expects us to write about Webcomics will eventually be disappointed, because the subject matter of Websnark is "whatever Weds or I feels like talking about." If I decide to do thirty posts on Yak Herding, I will. It's my blog. I pay for it.

(By the way -- though I say "it's my blog" here and elsewhere, that doesn't mean it's not also Wednesday's blog. It is. We work together on it. And on many other things.)

And, if you read thirty posts on Yak Herding, and decide you don't like the subject or the way I convey it, it's your right to stop reading Websnark. And to tell others that Websnark sucks. And to not buy tee shirts or whatever else. The price of freedom is the fact that no one has to listen to you.

Comment from: B.G.Aesop posted at July 22, 2005 5:52 PM

Oh g-d, you know about Foibles? That is my most shameful memory in the history of the internet... worst webcomic ever. But I digress. I see your point when you say that it comes across as rude. And I am curious, what other projects do you and Wednesday collaborate on? She doesn't do anything for Gossamer Commons, does she? The blurb for that says it's you and Greg Holkan, the guy from Seppuku, right? And I guess I get your point with the Yak Herding thing. I'm sorry if I offended you or Wednesday, I really did come off like an ass in that rant.

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at July 22, 2005 6:04 PM

Weds edits my scripts for Gossamer Commons and does all the web development, including hacking WordPress into shape. When we got virus-nailed, it was Weds who went two nights without sleep to get it back up and running. She also does admin type stuff when I'm not available (including posting strips I can't for some reason) and interacts with Greg to a certain degree.

So... well, yeah. She does a thing or two in Gossamer Commons. ;)

I'm sorry if I offended you or Wednesday, I really did come off like an ass in that rant.

On my side, apology accepted. I can't speak for Weds (who no doubt isn't planning on commenting on any of this).

Comment from: William_G posted at July 22, 2005 7:46 PM

On my side, apology accepted. I can't speak for Weds (who no doubt isn't planning on commenting on any of this).

And I was hoping my Hunter S Thompson comment would have drawn her in! :D

Anyway, Wednesday won me over with her Broken Saints review for the Webcomics Examiner. And I agree, this is a friggin' blog, not a masters thesis writing exercise. You kookie kids keep doing what you're doing.

You're alright in my books.

Comment from: 32_footsteps posted at July 22, 2005 11:01 PM

Wait, this isn't a master's writing thesis? I beg to differ; with all the discussion of symbolism and grammar, what else could it be?

Comment from: larksilver posted at July 23, 2005 1:15 AM

I had some difficulty, in the beginning, following what our Ms. White had to say. The rhythm of her writing is quite different from Mr. Burns' (damn the torpedoes, there's no additional S there), and I found it .. jarring at first. Entertaining, certainly, but a bit like switching gears mid-freeway.

After the first few snarks of hers, however, I began to catch on to that rhythm, and am glad I put in the effort to do so. For her writing style is delightful and refreshing, and I enjoy the hell out of her posts even when I have absolutely no clue what she's talking about. Not that she's vague or unclear, but generally, well, I don't know her chosen subject matter. Anime? Blah. Jack Chick? ick. Tea? Okay, okay, tea, I can do.

But who cares? They're so much fun, how can I not read them anyway? I despise anime, but love to hear her write about it. How is this any different from my NOT being an In Nomine player, and yet devouring every word Eric writes about In Nomine?

To me, a good writer can take something like Yak Herding and create an essay which draws the reader in, building a dynamic energy between reader, subject, and writer. The subject matter does not make the writer; rather it is the writer who illuminates the subject.

We all tout Eric's ability to turn us on to webcomics we might never have looked twice at, and yet I see a number of posts up there essentially trashing Wednesday for not "staying on topic," and for talking about things the posters are not familiar with. So what? Isn't that what we come here for? To have our eyes opened to things we hadn't noticed before? To experience good writing, the kind that is accessible to just about everyone, while presenting a challenge or two?

So often, Eric's essays present a subtle challenge: "Look at this as an example of literature rather than a Sunday comic," he seems to say. Wednesday's work provides the same challenge to grow as a reader.

Besides that, ranting in a post put out for your enjoyment about "not caring what she has to say" is just plain rude. It's like staying the night as a guest in someone's home and griping the whole time about the food they serve or the mattress being too firm. tsk.

Comment from: siwangmu posted at July 23, 2005 2:49 PM

I love to read what Wednesday says! This may be partly because every time I read something of hers I get to think the name "Wednesday White" and I think it's an astoundingly melodic and lovely name, but it's also because her posts are fun to read! I have to admit, I do tend to not know what she's talking about. Canadian radio humor, bands with which I am unfamiliar... I seem to have a much smaller shared context with Wednesday than I do with Eric. Is it weird that even though the writing style is a little alien and I frequently don't understand the references, I love to read her posts anyway? Because I do. And I'm afraid that I think posting "Does anyone else neither know nor care what she says, ever" is unspeakably rude. I'm not sure whether that counts as a personal attack, because I'm honestly not sure how posting that in response to a comment from someone on their own blog which you have bothered to come and read could possibly be considered not rude, but if it is an attack, then I am terribly sorry and will attempt to withdraw the comment in spirit even if I would not do so in fact.

Yay for Wednesday.

Comment from: RoboYuji posted at July 24, 2005 3:49 AM

Wednesday writes about anime, live action Sailor Moon, and reads Nana's Everyday Life, so she's okay in Yuji's book!

Comment from: siwangmu posted at July 25, 2005 12:02 AM

(One more thing: reading back through this, I have only just now managed to figure out what the hell the T in THMATLM was supposed to stand for (they... right?). I was terribly confounded, I tell you, as typoing T for Y twice in the correct locations would probably take a decently large group of monkeys with typewriters (I really want to segue to a joke where I call Eric a monkey with a typewriter, but, honestly, half my thoughts are assembling in Japanese right now, so just pretend I did).

I submit that Thou Had Me and Thou Lost Me would be an awesomely pretentious way to, I dunno, diss Shakeapeare some April Fools' Day.

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?