Comments on: Daniel Mendelsohn: Clueless About Online Culture

By: Lee

Lee — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 06:43:38 +0000

I’m never quite happy with the excuse ‘it’s just a joke’. Jokes often indicate underlying attitudes and additionally can function to create a sense of ingroup moral superiority.
I’d hazard a guess that Mendelsohn wouldn’t care to make an ethnic joke, for example, in such company.

That said, I agree, however, that there is a lot of lame commentary online. Whether it passes for literary criticism (or even intends to) is another matter.

By: Matt Mendelsohn

Matt Mendelsohn — Sat, 10 Mar 2007 16:00:52 +0000

Blowhards may abound, but so does hyperbole. Phrases like “blowhard” and “clueless” don’t exactly add a lot to the debate. You can parse as you like, but I think you’re creating conspiracy here where none exists. It was clear that Daniel’s funny acceptance speech, and particularly his opening remark, was not intended as an indictment of serious literary blogs (both yours and Edward’s are quite impressive) but rather the Amazon-type reviewer who writes that Dr. Zhivago is “soooooo depressing” and thinks he’s ready for the NYTBR.

As someone who is quite devoted to books, I’m sure that you’re quite aware of the peril of reading too much into something. It was just a joke.

Again, regards,

Matt Mendelsohn

By: Sarah

Sarah — Fri, 09 Mar 2007 21:16:53 +0000

All things being equal, I’d rather know a lot about culture, period, wherever it may be found. Blowhards abound in print and online, and fogeys abound in every generation set, old and young. Mendelsohn deserved to win, but his comment was ill-advised and misinformed.

By: Matt Mendelsohn

Matt Mendelsohn — Fri, 09 Mar 2007 20:08:04 +0000

Well, since you kid, I’ll kid too:

All things being equal, I’d rather know a lot about culture and not as much about online culture. And, at 46, I wouldn’t exactly classify my brother as a “fogie.”

Cheers,

Matt Mendelsohn