For What It’s Worth

Hmmm, I don’t know how “Franzen’s no fun” equates to “Franzen’s a jerk.” I certainly didn’t say the latter to this individual. But unlike this individual, I won’t use modifiers here. I’ll let listeners judge for themselves whether the encounter was a “toxic provocation.”


  1. Judging for myself, “toxic provocation,” no. Weird and awkward, yes Not clear what Franzen should or could’ve done to be “fun” with the approach.

  2. In my opinion, Franzen definitely overreacted (one could argue he was being a jerk…), as part of attending such events/being Franzen is dealing with the media.

    But… Ed did come across as a little manic/unapproachable, and however much of an asshole he was being, the man had a bit of a point.

  3. Silly question maybe, but where did the “toxic provocation” quote come from? From the audio clip (and previous experience) I think Franzen is a bit of a stiff, and Ed does come on a bit too strong in the exchange, but who’s blowing this up into something more?

  4. Jesus H., if a writer can’t take a little interviewing from his adoring public, then why show up? It’s not like he has anything on the line. Nice to know Hogan can remain objective.

  5. Emboldened by the realisation that my “Evil Kirk” comment wasn’t deleted, I’ll go even further and suggest that that wasn’t Jonathan Franzen at all, and that Ed’s powers of ventriloquism are so frighteningly polished that he managed to make the “two” voices overlap. But, come on, it’s obvious that both those voices were Ed. No way in hell a millionaire *really talks like that*.

  6. I just hope we can put this whole mess behind us and get back to the important content – Photoshopped pictures of talking cats.

  7. Sorry, Ed, but you come across as sort of a creepy jerk on that clip. Franzen may not be the nicest person in the world, but you come off as far, far worse in that exchange than he does.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *