Article Response: Salon's Grammy Blog

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (21 of them)
But that's the whole point: The execution was intentional. It was loaded with non-sequitors and off-the-cuff rants instead of some bloated think piece, a trend in blogging that TOO should be mocked. I don't know...I guess I read too many bad blogs, so I thought he nailed it. How would you have done it differently, you think?

Playa Hata, Tuesday, 10 February 2004 05:46 (twenty years ago) link

Less gay more hipsterish, for one thing

Sym (shmuel), Tuesday, 10 February 2004 05:52 (twenty years ago) link

Less gay? How? Examples? I'm just curious.

Playa Hata, Tuesday, 10 February 2004 06:05 (twenty years ago) link

Faboo? Jannie Jackoo?
Are there any lines you thought were particularly funny?

Sym (shmuel), Tuesday, 10 February 2004 06:10 (twenty years ago) link

I have to agree with Sym: the article didn't read as a parody of Music Blogs, but as a parody of Salon's opinion of Music Blogs.

Going by my initial reactions to music blogs (ie reactions to the most obvious/begging to be parodied elements).

Initial Reactions were:

1) Higher standard of writing/thought than in big media.
2) Less likely to have rants about death of pop/rock/albums/whatever.
3) Obsessed with pop and interested in taking pop music seriously.
4) Conversation tone meaning: a)a pain to get into as they are referring to articles/squabbles/arguments/theories the first-time reader have no idea about (and no introductory chapter) b) constant referring to other blogs.

These are features that I see no trace of in this parody.

A better parody (for example) would have featured complaints about Timberlake performance featuring not enough dancing by Timberlake and bemoaned his striving towards musicality.

Jedmond, Tuesday, 10 February 2004 06:28 (twenty years ago) link

Oh trust me, 4b) was there in full effect

nate detritus (natedetritus), Tuesday, 10 February 2004 06:34 (twenty years ago) link

ok, true, I take back 4b (damn late addtions to ones post)- even though it comes out as if he's referring to personal friends with stupid names (as opposed to bloggers with stupid blog names).

And I should also concede I only read ILM associated Blogs - there is probably a whole world of pain waiting out there (as hinted by small intrusions into ILM - Dame Matthews Thread for one).

Jedmond, Tuesday, 10 February 2004 06:39 (twenty years ago) link

compare, contrast: http://www.whatevs.org/2004_02_08_whatevs_archive.html#107630542765169575

Sym (shmuel), Tuesday, 10 February 2004 10:03 (twenty years ago) link

Mmmmmm forced...

ModJ (ModJ), Tuesday, 10 February 2004 11:58 (twenty years ago) link

Oh, - and that blog writer is still partly in ILM world - he has links to 2 blogs that I read - Sasha's and Fluxblog.

Somewhere in the infinite reachs of the interweb is an exact duplicate of Neil Pollacks article - only written by somebody who meant for his blog to be taken seriously.

Jedmond, Tuesday, 10 February 2004 13:37 (twenty years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.