Noam Chomsky has a blog.
Category / Blogging
Link-Pilfering? Nah, It’s Really About Courtesy
Well, now that it’s out in the open, and Jessa seems to want to turn this into a contentious war (which it isn’t and it shouldn’t be), I’ll go on public record and state that Jessa has pilfered links from my site many times. I know this to be true, because specific phrasing that I’ve used here has been recycled without credit for her site. In one case, she believed my satirical embellishment about Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye being under review because kids were exchanging “penis jokes” in the classroom to be true. Seemed obvious enough malarkey to me. But I e-mailed Jessa all the same with a correction.
Instead of a brief thank you or a self-deprecating acknowledgment in her post that she was wrong aw shucks, the link was changed without comment and my email went unanswered.
Jessa’s blogging tendencies certainly don’t bother me as much as other people. (And I don’t know of any names or conspiracy going on here really.) But I’m absolutely mystified why she would think that my email (among many, apparently) was an attack, when it was a jokey courtesy, intended solely for her benefit, puncutated with a smiley face. I’m also perplexed why she would go after Teachout (one of the classiest cats in the biz) and, more interestingly, the blogging community.
A few words about the book-blogging community, and why they’re so damned hep: Since I restarted this blog in December with an emphasis on books and literature, I’ve discovered fascinating new sites, I’ve had e-mail exchanges with nifty people who have alerted me to ideas and writers I had never heard about, and I’ve been extremely grateful for how these folks have helped me to develop my own thinking about literature. The general clime is a marvelous, sharp, and jokey bunch who, yes, reference and wink at each other, but also support each other. They also look out for each other from time to time. It’s a bit like being part of one of the coolest block parties on the planet.
I certainly respect Jessa for being one of the first book blogs on the Net. I still check out her site on a daily basis. Can’t help myself. And, again, I’m not certain if Teachout’s citation thing is as big a deal to me as it is to others.
But in misinterpreting a supportive effort as “an attack,” in not being courteous enough to respond to those who reward her with links, stories, corrections, or thoughtful book reviews, all gratis, I think Jessa’s out of line. I’ve suggested to others who are extremely infuriated with her that it’s just “a Jessa thang,” that it ain’t a big deal, and to not take it personally.
But if we recall last year’s gross characterization of Jessa as a vodka-swilling, shorts-absconding social climber, we begin to see how neglecting simple courtesies often creates these misunderstandings.
And in this case, Jessa’s very wrong. It’s a colossal mistake to dismiss the book blog community. We’re not the Bill Kellers or the Laura Millers. We’re the ones who give more than six damns (or in Lizzie’s case, multiple fucks) about literature.
It’s almost as unpardonable as forgetting to say “Thank you.”
NYT vs. Blogs
Wired: “So Withers decided to start the Wilgoren Watch, dedicated to deconstructing The New York Times’ coverage of Howard Dean’s campaign. Within weeks, the site had a prominent visitor: Wilgoren herself. The reporter has mixed feelings about the site. ”
Slate: “For his labors, Radosh earned an ugly set of threats from Landesman. And though apologies were eventually extended to Radosh by Landesman and the Times Magazine for Landesman’s behavior, the writer still reserves the right to punish the blogger in court for what he wrote.”
OpEdNews.com: “David Brooks, who joined the New York Times op-ed page with a reputation as one of the few neocons with intellectual integrity, has seen his reputation dwindle rapidly under the scrutiny of the blogosphere.”
Clarifying the Conspiracy
There’s something which needs to be stated for the record. I am TMFTML. Neal Pollack is too. (And here you all are wondering why Pollack’s been quiet. Well, I assure you, the crazy bastard’s been a workhorse.) And sometimes the Hag and Moby (curiously absent too — with purpose, I assure you) get their say in. I’ve tried to throw you folks off, what with riffs against the first person plural. However, in the case of TMFTML, the entity that speaks is not unlike the one depicted in Theodore Sturgeon’s More Than Human, which is why “we” is sometimes invoked.
So you can stop pestering the purported singular author. We’re all laughing our asses off over the fact that you care and that you think that we’re one individual. When, in fact, we’re several people who cooked this idea up back in 1999, when we were drunk and wondering if all the computers were going to collapse because of Y2K.
The fact that you’ve believe us for so long has us chortling with laughter. The fact that you believe we have a day job and that we’re actually in New York has us reaching for the bottle. Because the gambit’s funnier with liquor.
The other great revelation, that has smething to do with all this, is that BOOG is actually Bill Keller. The Times has been paying cash installments to much of the blog cabal in an effort to increase its subscription base.
Terry Teachout and OGIC, however, have nothing to do with this.
The Link, The Whole Link and Nothing But the Link
Rittenhouse: “If you link to ‘Wonkette’ through your blogroll you cannot and will not enjoy, for what that might be worth, a link from The Rittenhouse Review.”
He claims he’s not serious. But given the focus on ad hominen and his failure to offer a single reasonable argument, I suspect he’s saving face. Allow me to clarify the linkage process.
Wonkette (and The Antic Muse) is linked on the left because the site meets the goods. I link ’em because I like ’em. There is no quid pro quo. That’s not the point.
The beef I have with James Martin Capozzola is that he seems to view the basic process of linking as somehow exclusionary, when, in fact, it’s more inclusive than anything else. While Sturgeon’s Law can certainly apply to blogs, there are so many of them out there that, even if 10% of them were excellent, the list would be long and unmanageable. To include everyone would require a time commitment that well beyond the realms of healthy human commitment.
There is no Machiavellian scheming or Oliver Stone conspiracy theory. There is no secret society, whereby one person links to another, and another person does not. A link on the left is based solely on merit or friendship or both. A non-linked blog is probably one I’m not aware of.
[1/23/06 UPDATE: And I should also note that many of the people on the blogroll are, in fact, people who loathe me for reasons I cannot entirely discern. I should point out that being a fairly forgiving person, I’ve never entirely understood the concept of hate at first sight. I understand being reluctant to talk to certain people because (a) they are high maintenance, (b) they are, in all interactions, a nuisance and (c) they are doing something which you perceive as damaging to your core values. But completely damning someone without trying to talk with them? Granted, I can be an emotional and intensely loyal fellow to my friends. But the idealist in me also believes that people can violently disagree with each other and still maintain a civil relationship. And I’m not certain how I got on this subject, but it’s probably me being introspective again (damn solipsism!) and contemplating the connection between being simultaneously forgiving and aggressive and whether it affects the blogroll. Perhaps Rittenhouse’s claims might hold some validity after all.]