Leitch on Ebert

[Ace]

On the flip side, Will Leitch prostituting his relationship with Ebert yet again, heartfelt or otherwise, only reestablishes/reaffirms what a complete mensch Roger Ebert is. So while there may be selfish motivations in offering this mea culpa, in the end, it's another chance to recognize that Ebert is someone genuinely worth admiring.

I think what I also took from this is that writing will always be writing. (The same way that music will always be music.) And real writers -- and I think Leitch is one, despite his unique brand of self-deprecating narcissism -- will always want the approval and advice and friendship of real writers. The medium does not matter. Already there seems to be a reassessment taking place. Some of the young turks (as Leitch describes himself) who saw themselves as punk rock journalists determined to tear down their idols and build a new way on the net, are no longer 25 and convinced they have all the answers. We're the same age, he and I. And I can see how easily I could have taken the route he did -- maybe not in terms of success, but certainly style and tone. It's so easy, when you're young, to think THESE ARE SOME THINGS I THINK, AND THEY ARE MUCH SMARTER AND INTERESTING THAN ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID BEFORE! You need someone to yank on your belt loop and prevent you from unleashing your inner asshole.

And so even though so many internet rock stars like Leitch write stories that are still mostly told through a prism of "ME!" -- because anyone who ever came of age as a writer without the help of an editor thinks this is the only way to tell a story or look at the world -- they're starting to feel some remorse about painting their "We're the new kings!" rage with such a broad brush.

Yes, there was some cultural value in poking a stick at tired, phony acts like Jay Mariotti or Skip Bayless ... but Roger Ebert?

I suspect in the coming years, Leitch will look back at a number of things he did/wrote and cringe at the way he told them. It's such a delicate balancing act between "edgy, interesting commentary" and "narcissism." At least the Will Leitch Heartfelt Apology Tour will have plenty of fuel as it churns forward toward new horizons.

Nicely said, Double D.

 

[Piotr Rasputin]

On the flip side, Will Leitch prostituting his relationship with Ebert yet again, heartfelt or otherwise, only reestablishes/reaffirms what a complete mensch Roger Ebert is. So while there may be selfish motivations in offering this mea culpa, in the end, it's another chance to recognize that Ebert is someone genuinely worth admiring.

That was what I took from it, just what a great person Roger Ebert is. Leitch and his breast beating are of no consequence.

Ebert . . . I wish I'd had the chance to meet him, just once.

 

[Billy Pritchard]

On the flip side, Will Leitch prostituting his relationship with Ebert yet again, heartfelt or otherwise, only reestablishes/reaffirms what a complete mensch Roger Ebert is. So while there may be selfish motivations in offering this mea culpa, in the end, it's another chance to recognize that Ebert is someone genuinely worth admiring.

That was what I took from it, just what a great person Roger Ebert is. Leitch and his breast beating are of no consequence.

Ebert . . . I wish I'd had the chance to meet him, just once.

Ummm, he's not dead. No need to use the past tense.

 

[Piotr Rasputin]

On the flip side, Will Leitch prostituting his relationship with Ebert yet again, heartfelt or otherwise, only reestablishes/reaffirms what a complete mensch Roger Ebert is. So while there may be selfish motivations in offering this mea culpa, in the end, it's another chance to recognize that Ebert is someone genuinely worth admiring.

That was what I took from it, just what a great person Roger Ebert is. Leitch and his breast beating are of no consequence.

Ebert . . . I wish I'd had the chance to meet him, just once.

Ummm, he's not dead. No need to use the past tense.

Right after I typed that, I realized my error . . . I'll never have a chance to kiss his butt as a college student, so the moment has passed.

 

[WaylonJennings]

I don't have an opinion one way or the other about whether Leitch should have written the piece or what his motivations are. However, I am completely on board with the idea that this is symbolic of the snark generation of Internet 1.0 kind of coming of age and realizing how they came off. There was about a five-year span there where any time I talked to a high school student with aspirations to write sports, I knew he was going to tell me that he "considers my style kind of like a Will Leitch/Bill Simmons/Chuck Klosterman-type of writing."

 

[OrthogonalWaterfowl]

I don't have an opinion one way or the other about whether Leitch should have written the piece or what his motivations are. However, I am completely on board with the idea that this is symbolic of the snark generation of Internet 1.0 kind of coming of age and realizing how they came off. There was about a five-year span there where any time I talked to a high school student with aspirations to write sports, I knew he was going to tell me that he "considers my style kind of like a Will Leitch/Bill Simmons/Chuck Klosterman-type of writing."

I'm only 26, so this may be marking me as a fuddy-duddy before my time, but I've always been of the opinion that before you can let loose with a unique, genre-bending style, you need to establish yourself as a restrained and disciplined writer. Defying conventions doesn't mean anything if you don't have a firm grasp of what those conventions are and why you might want to defy them (look at abstract and surrealist painters - most of those guys could paint masterfully in a conventional style, they just chose not to).

Far too many people who want to get into writing read someone like Hunter S. Thompson and go, "Oh, THIS is real journalism, this is how it should be!" and then go write about how their high school wrestling championships were a pit of depravity and unrestrained machismo that rips bare the heart of the American dream like an icepick to a pig carcass, or whatever.

Likewise - and bringing my post back to something more on-topic - when Ebert lets loose on a movie or on some celebrity, it's only impactful because he's not constantly doing it. Looking around the internet, I see far too many writers (film and music reviewers especially) who feel compelled to go to great lengths to either hyperbolically praise or trash anything that comes across their desk. It's funny at first, but it gets tiring and old really fast.

 

[goalmouth]

Leitch, Simmons and their ilk -- astounding examples of untalented hacks leading the pussification of the American male writer. Norman Mailer would sooner stab his wife with a pen than apologize for anything.

 

[Inky_Wretch]

Good gosh, this Oprah episode is equal parts heart-breaking and uplifting.

 

[imjustagirl]

I'm DVRing it! NO spoilers!

 

[Harry Doyle]

Leitch, Simmons and their ilk -- astounding examples of untalented hacks leading the pussification of the American male writer. Norman Mailer would sooner stab his wife with a pen than apologize for anything.

Norman Mailer wouldn't write that he hated Roger Ebert simply for the sake of having said it, either.

I liked Leitch's piece. I thought it was endearing and gave you a great look at the man Ebert has always been. It was a story much more about Ebert than it was about Leitch. But for Leitch to write it, he had to be totally forthcoming. Besides, Ebert's reaction to "I am tired of Roger Ebert's Fat Face," or whatever it was called, was the most illuminating thing in that entire essay. Of course Will Leitch was new-age erudite and looking to leave his mark. The idea that he would lash out at his hero says a great deal about his character. But that doesn't mean it wasn't a fascinating read, and that doesn't mean he shouldn't have written it.

 

[21]

So many great posts on this thread, about timing and opportunism and class and the lack thereof, so I just want to add this:

Genuine remorse and regret doesn't belong first in print. It begins with a truly sincere (and probably painful) PERSONAL apology--a call, a letter, a meeting--directly to the person who was brutalized/humiliated/hurt. After that, if you really have to write about the experience, have at it

Anything less is just cowardly.

 

[Double Down]

So many great posts on this thread, about timing and opportunism and class and the lack thereof, so I just want to add this:

Genuine remorse and regret doesn't belong first in print. It begins with a truly sincere (and probably painful) PERSONAL apology--a call, a letter, a meeting--directly to the person who was brutalized/humiliated/hurt. After that, if you really have to write about the experience, have at it

Anything less is just cowardly.

This is what also struck me most, thinking about it his afternoon. Might seems strange to think of it this way at first, but it would have taken far more courage to write this and send it to an audience of one, instead of writing for an audience of thousands you hope Ebert is a member of.

 

[Inky_Wretch]

So many great posts on this thread, about timing and opportunism and class and the lack thereof, so I just want to add this:

Genuine remorse and regret doesn't belong first in print. It begins with a truly sincere (and probably painful) PERSONAL apology--a call, a letter, a meeting--directly to the person who was brutalized/humiliated/hurt. After that, if you really have to write about the experience, have at it

Anything less is just cowardly.

This is what also struck me most, thinking about it his afternoon. Might seems strange to think of it this way at first, but it would have taken far more courage to write this and send it to an audience of one, instead of writing for an audience of thousands you hope Ebert is a member of.

Forgive me for not remembering (nor taking the time to re-read) but did Leitch say he'd not apologized to Ebert before now?

 

[Ace]

So many great posts on this thread, about timing and opportunism and class and the lack thereof, so I just want to add this:

Genuine remorse and regret doesn't belong first in print. It begins with a truly sincere (and probably painful) PERSONAL apology--a call, a letter, a meeting--directly to the person who was brutalized/humiliated/hurt. After that, if you really have to write about the experience, have at it

Anything less is just cowardly.

This is what also struck me most, thinking about it his afternoon. Might seems strange to think of it this way at first, but it would have taken far more courage to write this and send it to an audience of one, instead of writing for an audience of thousands you hope Ebert is a member of.

Forgive me for not remembering (nor taking the time to re-read) but did Leitch say he'd not apologized to Ebert before now?

Leitch said that Ebert emailed him as soon as it hit the internet and Leitch said that he wrote back apologizing profusely.

 

[Cousin Jeffrey]

Here's what I find funny about some of this debate: People are more focused on Leitch the Person, the Poor Apologizer, the Web 2.0 punk, than this actual piece of writing.

No matter what you think of the guy, he is a writer, so he wrote about this personal story in his life that makes him look like an asshole. That's the best kind of writing, y'know, the honest kind. He told me he was wary of putting it out there, but i'm glad he did.

 

[21]

So many great posts on this thread, about timing and opportunism and class and the lack thereof, so I just want to add this:

Genuine remorse and regret doesn't belong first in print. It begins with a truly sincere (and probably painful) PERSONAL apology--a call, a letter, a meeting--directly to the person who was brutalized/humiliated/hurt. After that, if you really have to write about the experience, have at it

Anything less is just cowardly.

This is what also struck me most, thinking about it his afternoon. Might seems strange to think of it this way at first, but it would have taken far more courage to write this and send it to an audience of one, instead of writing for an audience of thousands you hope Ebert is a member of.

Forgive me for not remembering (nor taking the time to re-read) but did Leitch say he'd not apologized to Ebert before now?

He said he apologized at the time, sent flowers after Ebert's surgery.

Maybe he felt he felt he needed the grandiose mea culpa, but to do it in the wake of Esquire and Oprah is just so....obvious.

It shouldn't matter that Ebert is an icon and a current topic of conversation. It should only matter that this really great man helped a nobody at the DI, and helped him hugely.

And once again, in the wake of this public apology, Ebert helped the nobody, and helped him hugely.

 

[Ace]

The timing, motivation, whatever, doesn't bother me.

If you had never heard of Ebert, you can tell from Leitch's story that he is a terrific person and a fabulous writer just from the quoted emails.

I am glad for the chance to read it, timing be damned.

 

[21]

The timing, motivation, whatever, doesn't bother me.

If you had never heard of Ebert, you can tell from Leitch's story that he is a terrific person and a fabulous writer just from the quoted emails.

I am glad for the chance to read it, timing be damned.

And if I had never heard of Leitch, I might be more sympathetic.

But as others have pointed out, his long history of shredding people for the sake of entertainment just leaves me sad for Ebert, nothing more.

 

[Ace]

The timing, motivation, whatever, doesn't bother me.

If you had never heard of Ebert, you can tell from Leitch's story that he is a terrific person and a fabulous writer just from the quoted emails.

I am glad for the chance to read it, timing be damned.

And if I had never heard of Leitch, I might be more sympathetic.

But as others have pointed out, his long history of shredding people for the sake of entertainment just leaves me sad for Ebert, nothing more.

I understand. If it makes you feel better, the best bits of writing in Leitch's piece by a mile are Ebert's emails.

 

[Double Down]

Here's what I find funny about some of this debate: People are more focused on Leitch the Person, the Poor Apologizer, the Web 2.0 punk, than this actual piece of writing.

No matter what you think of the guy, he is a writer, so he wrote about this personal story in his life that makes him look like an asshole. That's the best kind of writing, y'know, the honest kind. He told me he was wary of putting it out there, but i'm glad he did.

When everything you write is about ME, ME, ME! how does one then begin to parse where the person stops and where the piece of writing begins? It's a risk you take when you make yourself the protagonist in all your tales.

The piece was well written, certainly. But stopping there seems a surfacey reading, at best. I think what we're saying is that Leitch, even in his attempt to make amends, still comes across as someone trying to ride the current cultural wave and cleanse himself of past sins. Maybe he should send a thank you note to Chris Jones too for helping him remember how much he adored Roger Ebert before he **** on him in public in exchange for a few laughs.

But again, the writing was nice. What of the soul?