Sorry for taking 5 minutes of your life
To have a wide read forum and to be just a mean and nasty person, that's what I aspire to be someday. OK, that's a lie, I don't want to be mean and nasty or overly cynical. In fact I often wonder when I cross people that are all of the above, how they got to be that way and why they choose to be. I'm not saying that everyone is or should be happy go lucky all the time, but to be so deep rooted in cynacism and general ill-will that it's all you seem to espouse has to make you wonder about a person.
Well, I wonder a great deal about Dan Shaugnessy, a sports columnist for the Boston Globe, my sports section of choice. In case you don't know much about the man, he is somewhat of a controversial voice in Boston for the stands he takes and the things he writes about. I personally don't care much for his writing or his insight. I think it's overly cynical, sarcastic, mean and at some times absolutely useless. He is largely responsible for proliferating the whole "Curse of the Bambino" nonsense, a concept that caused me a great deal of irritation over the years. His overall writings have caused me such annoyance that I vowed if I ever met him in person I would punch him in the face. (Side note - I met him in person once, held and elevator open for him and since this was at a sports event and I didn't want to be thrown off the premises I didn't not punch him in the face, so the next time I see him I will punch him). Everytime I finish reading him, I feel like he's wasted five minutes of my life.
His writing style can best be equated like this. He is cynical and sarcastic and over the top about it. He is a revisionist in every sense of the word when rehashing things. He never seems to have any qualms about offering advice and pointing out what has been done wrong and how he would do it different, after it happened of course (see revisionist). When he does present an argument, he argues as though his point is holy and that he is infallible. Even if his claim is outrageous and is based on nothing but sheer ill-will to the party he is talking about, he backs up his point as though there is no other side to the story. In short, he argues like a person who argues a ridiculous point and when you've deconstructed their argument to the point where they have nothing to argue anymore and you ask them what they have to base their argument on they say "Because I said so, that's why." They argue based on arrogance and not on substance, essentilly they are a waste of time.
Anyway, the Red Sox just signed a pitcher from Japan last week. It was something of a big deal here in the New England area and somewhat nationally. You may have even heard about it some. Well of course the following day in the paper there is a Shaugnessy entry about Daisuke Matsuzaka, the Japanese pitcher who is now coming to Boston. What Shaugnessy offers quite honestly is pretty much a waste of column inches and the readers time.
He decided to take the premise of welcoming Matsuzaka to Boston then offering him tips of advice piece by piece through the column. Sounds like a nice idea, not even a bad premise, problem being is the way he delivers it.
It's not some cutesy column about dropping his "r's" from his speech once he picks up english. Or where to grab himself a bowl of clam chowder. Aside from a couple of paragraphs the whole column is filled with digs at various members of the Red Sox or others of the Boston media. The shots he takes aren't even veiled, he doesn't bother hiding them at all. It's fine I suppose to take a strong stance if your a columnist, that's part of what they're supposed to do. Except what is he taking a stand on here? Is he proving he can pick on anybody he wants whenever he wants to? Is he trying to be funny? (The answer there is no) The basic job of the columnist is to try aad raise our level of thinking or insight. Well, he fails and miserably on both counts. Instead he delivers an effort that seems like was completely mailed in, an effort that seems to be attemping to make waves when none are needed. Basically he uses his space in the paper just to bitch and take shots at people for no real reason.
Yes, I'm aware of the irony of pointing out some one who is bitching out others while I am doing the same here, but we are in different positions. He's a reporter, a columnist and I'm a jackass in front of a keyboard (well maybe we aren't that different). Seriously though, newspapers are supposed to be sources of information, have formalized codes of ethics, etc. Well there's no information presented from Shaugnessy here and while his effort isn't really unethical is there any actual base to it?
What makes his lack of effort all the more infuriating is the efforts turned in by his colleagues. Jackie MacMullan turns in an effort that actually brings up some interesting questions and appears to have some thought behind it. Gordon Edes turns in a wonderful account of the whole process that happened in the final days to get Matsuzaka signed. I read what they wrote and I find myself enlightened to a degree. I also find myself feeling sorry for them that their stories have to share space with Shaugnessy.
Part of me wants to believe it's just a sthick that he has adopted in his writing, but it just doesn't seem that way. Every column he seems to spew out always has some kind of negative connetation in it. Sometimes it's burried, but most often it's not. He seems to like being a lightning rod and that's fine I guess. But that shouldn't be your whole purpose. When there is a time for you to take a stand that might not be that popular, fine, do it and take all the attention that goes along with it; but don't just say things to make sure people notice you. Those kind of people are the kind we can do without, the kind that want to be paid attention to just so you don't pay attention to someboday else.
I guess the best I can take from a guy like him is make sure that I never become some one like him. Some one who dwells on the negative, who picks fights when they don't need to be, some one who just seems to want to bring everyone around them down just so everyone will pay attention to them. Well in that case, I'm sorry now, for making you pay attention to him too. Go back to doing what you were doing and if you can, do it with a smile on, just so you won't be like him.
Well, I wonder a great deal about Dan Shaugnessy, a sports columnist for the Boston Globe, my sports section of choice. In case you don't know much about the man, he is somewhat of a controversial voice in Boston for the stands he takes and the things he writes about. I personally don't care much for his writing or his insight. I think it's overly cynical, sarcastic, mean and at some times absolutely useless. He is largely responsible for proliferating the whole "Curse of the Bambino" nonsense, a concept that caused me a great deal of irritation over the years. His overall writings have caused me such annoyance that I vowed if I ever met him in person I would punch him in the face. (Side note - I met him in person once, held and elevator open for him and since this was at a sports event and I didn't want to be thrown off the premises I didn't not punch him in the face, so the next time I see him I will punch him). Everytime I finish reading him, I feel like he's wasted five minutes of my life.
His writing style can best be equated like this. He is cynical and sarcastic and over the top about it. He is a revisionist in every sense of the word when rehashing things. He never seems to have any qualms about offering advice and pointing out what has been done wrong and how he would do it different, after it happened of course (see revisionist). When he does present an argument, he argues as though his point is holy and that he is infallible. Even if his claim is outrageous and is based on nothing but sheer ill-will to the party he is talking about, he backs up his point as though there is no other side to the story. In short, he argues like a person who argues a ridiculous point and when you've deconstructed their argument to the point where they have nothing to argue anymore and you ask them what they have to base their argument on they say "Because I said so, that's why." They argue based on arrogance and not on substance, essentilly they are a waste of time.
Anyway, the Red Sox just signed a pitcher from Japan last week. It was something of a big deal here in the New England area and somewhat nationally. You may have even heard about it some. Well of course the following day in the paper there is a Shaugnessy entry about Daisuke Matsuzaka, the Japanese pitcher who is now coming to Boston. What Shaugnessy offers quite honestly is pretty much a waste of column inches and the readers time.
He decided to take the premise of welcoming Matsuzaka to Boston then offering him tips of advice piece by piece through the column. Sounds like a nice idea, not even a bad premise, problem being is the way he delivers it.
It's not some cutesy column about dropping his "r's" from his speech once he picks up english. Or where to grab himself a bowl of clam chowder. Aside from a couple of paragraphs the whole column is filled with digs at various members of the Red Sox or others of the Boston media. The shots he takes aren't even veiled, he doesn't bother hiding them at all. It's fine I suppose to take a strong stance if your a columnist, that's part of what they're supposed to do. Except what is he taking a stand on here? Is he proving he can pick on anybody he wants whenever he wants to? Is he trying to be funny? (The answer there is no) The basic job of the columnist is to try aad raise our level of thinking or insight. Well, he fails and miserably on both counts. Instead he delivers an effort that seems like was completely mailed in, an effort that seems to be attemping to make waves when none are needed. Basically he uses his space in the paper just to bitch and take shots at people for no real reason.
Yes, I'm aware of the irony of pointing out some one who is bitching out others while I am doing the same here, but we are in different positions. He's a reporter, a columnist and I'm a jackass in front of a keyboard (well maybe we aren't that different). Seriously though, newspapers are supposed to be sources of information, have formalized codes of ethics, etc. Well there's no information presented from Shaugnessy here and while his effort isn't really unethical is there any actual base to it?
What makes his lack of effort all the more infuriating is the efforts turned in by his colleagues. Jackie MacMullan turns in an effort that actually brings up some interesting questions and appears to have some thought behind it. Gordon Edes turns in a wonderful account of the whole process that happened in the final days to get Matsuzaka signed. I read what they wrote and I find myself enlightened to a degree. I also find myself feeling sorry for them that their stories have to share space with Shaugnessy.
Part of me wants to believe it's just a sthick that he has adopted in his writing, but it just doesn't seem that way. Every column he seems to spew out always has some kind of negative connetation in it. Sometimes it's burried, but most often it's not. He seems to like being a lightning rod and that's fine I guess. But that shouldn't be your whole purpose. When there is a time for you to take a stand that might not be that popular, fine, do it and take all the attention that goes along with it; but don't just say things to make sure people notice you. Those kind of people are the kind we can do without, the kind that want to be paid attention to just so you don't pay attention to someboday else.
I guess the best I can take from a guy like him is make sure that I never become some one like him. Some one who dwells on the negative, who picks fights when they don't need to be, some one who just seems to want to bring everyone around them down just so everyone will pay attention to them. Well in that case, I'm sorry now, for making you pay attention to him too. Go back to doing what you were doing and if you can, do it with a smile on, just so you won't be like him.
posted by MC at 4:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home