Thursday, November 21, 2002

the little twit responds

lynn sislo, who for some reason took such great umbrage at our recent tip jar rant that she began her post about it by calling skippy a little twit (there's some damn fine writing!) has responded to our (we thought) calm and reasoned discourse on her blog comments section. aside from her claim that she's a better writer than skippy (could be) and at least a good a writer as instapundit (can't say, glenn does little more than provide links these days) she actually hasn't responded to our points, other than saying that being published and having editors don't necessarily indicate that you are a good or bad writer. maybe not, but it certainly helps get your words beyond her self-admitted "15 regular readers."

we have no problem with ms. sislo's fisking of our post. we blog to dialogue. and it would be boring if we only got comments saying how brilliant our writing is (although, truth be told, we'd like to get that one at least once). most beginngers make the mistake of thinking that fisking is analysis and debate. it's a common modus operandi in blogtopia (yes! i coined that phrase!). of course, real political and social debate goes beyond the silly idea that finding a "no" for every sentense that says "yes" is refutation, let alone anything other than the monty python arguement sketch (no it isn't! yes it is!).

we certainly don't expect everyone to agree with our positions about anything (although, we are hoping that talkleft will still let us keep her quote about our work on our "endorsements" column; she still hasn't responded to our email, we think we really hurt her feelings with our silly rant).

however, our position is that ms. sislo not only showed extremely bad manners by calling skippy, whom she never had met, and whose work she obviously hadn't bothered to read past the paypal rant, a "little twit." not that it hurt our feelings (ok, the "twit" part, maybe, but as we said before, mrs. skippy can attest to the inaccuracies of the "little" part). but it certainly shows that ms. sislo is not half the writer she likes to think she is.

firstly, she misconstrues most of what we said. we are sorry she didn't understand the concept of metaphors, but she took our admonition to get a "pen and paper" instead of a blog to write, literally. she then spent a paragraph adding up the actual cost of the paper. we maintain that someone who doesn't know a metaphor when they see it is not a very mature writer. as for us, we never metaphor we didn't like.

then again, she takes our analysis that most bloggers have jobs that support their hobbies literally. she apparently is a domestic goddess, and good for her, we need more domestic goddesses. but again, she thinks that admitting she doesnt' have a job refutes our point. of course, someone has to support her, somehow, be it a husband, significant other, or trust fund. that in itself is the very income stream we were alluding to when talking about affording one's hobbies, including blogging.

are you beginning to see how fisking is not debating, but simply a series of straw men coming between you and reasoned analysis?

she then likens blogs with paypals to street performers who put hats down in front of their balloon animal acts on the corner. she is unwittingly arguing our side of the debate. how embarrassing, how pathetic, how pitiful for the lawyers and college professors and editors who blog to be likened to mimes and homeless guitar players begging for coins. but, you know what? that was our original point. thanks for doing our work for us, lynn!!

she then insists that one doesn't need a publisher if one has paypal. hm. ok, if you think a paypal link will support your family, we'll give you that one (here skippy is pointing a finger at his head and making circular motions with it, while crossing his eyes and imitating a coo-coo clock). she also assumes we don't read very many blogs. she is wrong. what can we say?

then she accuses us of not capitalizing our letters. lynn, better bloggers than you have pointed that out. we don't care. if it bothers you, take it up with our manager of capitalization (again, we wonder if someone unfamiliar with our manager of capitalization can be considered a good writer).

finally, when we say that there are more deserving charities than any bloggers who need our donations, ms. sislo's response is "Oh! There it is! "The Children." Okay folks I think we're done here." we don't see this as a valid refuting of our point. and we also don't see any humor or other value in this sentense to vindicate its existense. it's rather like, we're mad, so we're taking our ball and going home.

and then, don't get us started on her comments section!

lynn: Regarding your comment about doing it the hard way, with a publisher: Are you saying that nothing should ever change? That we should forever do things they way they have always been done? Screw publishers and editors! We don't need them anymore. Getting published or not getting published isn't necessarily an indicator of quality writing either. The readers can decide what's worth paying for and what isn't.

skippy responds: things change. but slowly. how well did stephen king's electronic novel do last year? it tanked. now, techincally speaking, sure, if you get $5.00 from a paypal fan, you are a paid writer, ie, a professional. but we can go the other way, too, and vanity publish ourselves, and claim that we are a published writer. however, our point, which you miss, is that it takes more than a handful here and there to write for a living. and if you're not writing for a living, you are either trying to write for a living or writing for a hobby. and if you are trying to write for a living you aren't blogging, you are spending most of your time working on your craft and getting it seen. and if you're writing for a hobby, but asking for donations, you are indeed like the professional lawyer or college prof moonlighting as a street performer, and it's a pretty pathetic picture.

it's too bad, because from what we see about poet and peasant, ms. sislo's blog, it's not a bad blog. except for the little twit part. we are indeed happy to put ms. sislo's blog on our permanent blog roll on skippy.