Writer V. Writer

[DanOregon]

Read the Taibbi thread on Tom Friedman and then came across this piece from The Atlantic. Seems nothing gets a writer's blood boiling than the exploits and excesses of another writer. And since we're "pen is mightier than the sword" types we don't go all Burr v. Hamilton. Instead, we take it to the 'nets, the message boards or perhaps (if cache is involved) even in print.
Here's Matthew Scully's rip-job of former boss and chief White House speechwriter Michael Gerson. Anyone have any other classic ripjobs of other writers?

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200709/michael-gerson

 

[jlee]

Wolfe vs. Irving, Updike, Mailer

http://archive.salon.com/books/log/2000/01/21/wolfe/index.html

 

[Angola!]

Wolfe vs. Irving, Updike, Mailer

http://archive.salon.com/books/log/2000/01/21/wolfe/index.html

I do love The Executioner's Song, but **** Tom Wolfe can't hold John Irving's jock.

 

[forever_town]

When I was on a political opinion Web site, one of the columns wrote a pure attack job bitching out the Dixie Chicks. I wrote a response to his column in which I attacked his *arguments*, not him.

He responded with an ad homenim attack column. I got one or two people who wrote me saying I should learn to write. I didn't respond to that, nor did I respond to his response.

The guy who ran the Web site (a Republican, BTW) suggested the D.C. area columnists get together for coffee or drinks. The funny thing was, he suggested not inviting the guy who blasted the Dixie Chicks. Even though he probably was more ideologically aligned to him than he was to me, he described said columnist as a piece of work.

And, said Web site organizer also pointed out getting e-mails that agreed with me instead of the other guy.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Michael Gerson?
"A first-rate mind"?
The great lake of Fail sees another boat push away from the dock.

 

[The Big Ragu]

Fenian_Bastard vs. Michael Gerson comes to mind.

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/posts/2335216/

 

[Double Down]

I do love The Executioner's Song, but **** Tom Wolfe can't hold John Irving's jock.

This comment is insane.

 

[Steak Snabler]

Roger Ebert vs. Rob Schneider (who is a screenwriter):

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050811/REVIEWS/50725001

Schneider was nominated for a 2000 Razzie Award for Worst Supporting Actor, but lost to Jar-Jar Binks.

But Schneider is correct, and Patrick Goldstein has not yet won a Pulitzer Prize. Therefore, Goldstein is not qualified to complain that Columbia financed "Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo" while passing on the opportunity to participate in "Million Dollar Baby," "Ray," "The Aviator," "Sideways" and "Finding Neverland."

As chance would have it, I have won the Pulitzer Prize, and so I am qualified. Speaking in my official capacity as a Pulitzer Prize winner, Mr. Schneider, your movie sucks.

 

[The Big Ragu]

I do love The Executioner's Song, but **** Tom Wolfe can't hold John Irving's jock.

This comment is insane.

I thought it. Didn't post it. I love John Irving... as a guilty pleasure. But I really disagree with that one.

 

[forever_town]

Fenian_Bastard vs. Michael Gerson comes to mind.

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/posts/2335216/

You just linked to the post directly above yours.

 

[Steak Snabler]

Fenian_Bastard vs. Michael Gerson comes to mind.

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/posts/2335216/

You just linked to the post directly above yours.

I think that's the joke.

 

[The Big Ragu]

Roger Ebert vs. Rob Schneider (who is a screenwriter):

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050811/REVIEWS/50725001

Schneider was nominated for a 2000 Razzie Award for Worst Supporting Actor, but lost to Jar-Jar Binks.

But Schneider is correct, and Patrick Goldstein has not yet won a Pulitzer Prize. Therefore, Goldstein is not qualified to complain that Columbia financed "Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo" while passing on the opportunity to participate in "Million Dollar Baby," "Ray," "The Aviator," "Sideways" and "Finding Neverland."

As chance would have it, I have won the Pulitzer Prize, and so I am qualified. Speaking in my official capacity as a Pulitzer Prize winner, Mr. Schneider, your movie sucks.

This is one of my favorite pieces of writing ever. I have read it about 500 times, and it still makes me laugh.

 

[Angola!]

I do love The Executioner's Song, but **** Tom Wolfe can't hold John Irving's jock.

This comment is insane.

Maybe the jock part was a bit much, but I think John Irving is an amazing author. Really amazing. And I'm just not that into Tom Wolfe. Never understood all the praise for him.

Edit to add: People seem to hate on Irving for being "crass" or writing weird novels, but I really think he is one of the best storytellers of the last 30 years.

 

[Double Down]

I do love The Executioner's Song, but **** Tom Wolfe can't hold John Irving's jock.

This comment is insane.

Maybe the jock part was a bit much, but I think John Irving is an amazing author. Really amazing. And I'm just not that into Tom Wolfe. Never understood all the praise for him.

Edit to add: People seem to hate on Irving for being "crass" or writing weird novels, but I really think he is one of the best storytellers of the last 30 years.

I like John Irving just fine. Rarely do I find his characters believable, but he is an interesting storyteller whose desire to be Dickens literary heir has led him to make some interesting choices as he's tried to layer his novels with social commentary. I like World According to Garp just fine, but I think Cider House Rules and Prayer for Owen Meany are extremely overrated, and I know those are fighting words because people get a literary erection here at SJ every time Prayer for OM comes up.

As a person, I like Irving far more than Wolfe, his ridiculous suits, and his snobbery, but none of Irving's books are as good at The Right Stuff or Bonfire of the Vanities. So to Wolfe cannot hold Irving's jock is silly.

 

[Angola!]

I do love The Executioner's Song, but **** Tom Wolfe can't hold John Irving's jock.

This comment is insane.

Maybe the jock part was a bit much, but I think John Irving is an amazing author. Really amazing. And I'm just not that into Tom Wolfe. Never understood all the praise for him.

Edit to add: People seem to hate on Irving for being "crass" or writing weird novels, but I really think he is one of the best storytellers of the last 30 years.

I like John Irving just fine. Rarely do I find his characters believable, but he is an interesting storyteller whose desire to be Dickens literary heir has led him to make some interesting choices as he's tried to layer his novels with social commentary. I like World According to Garp just fine, but I think Cider House Rules and Prayer for Owen Meany are extremely overrated, and I know those are fighting words because people get a literary erection here at SJ every time Prayer for OM comes up.

As a person, I like Irving far more than Wolfe, his ridiculous suits, and his snobbery, but none of Irving's books are as good at The Right Stuff or Bonfire of the Vanities. So to Wolfe cannot hold Irving's jock is silly.

I'll fight you to the death on Prayer for Owen Meany.

I took back the jock comment, that was late-night alcohol fueled posting.

His characters may not be the most believable, but I think he tells such a good story that it doesn't matter and as you said, they are very layered with a good mix of social commentary.

As far as Dickens, well, I have never actually read a Dickens novel, so I can't attest to any of that. I really dislike most European authors and don't read them. It's a poor personality trait of mine.