(Post a new comment)

	tybalt_quin 2004-04-05 10:27 pm UTC (link)
	Hey! It's not that bloody facile .... :looks at GP: Oh wait. It is. Carry on. I'm going to sit here calmly, waiting to scapegoat an MP with my G&T in one hand and my AA chip in the other. t-q (Reply to this)

	narcissam 2004-04-05 10:35 pm UTC (link)
	Yey! I'm on Fandom Wank! Unfortunately, FBP has edited the post. It no longer includes the bit about my not being fit for civilized society. NM (Reply to this)

	(Anonymous) 2004-04-05 10:35 pm UTC (link)
	I actually sort of liked the metaphors. :) (Reply to this)(Thread)

	truculent 2004-04-05 10:42 pm UTC (link)
	As did I. FBP is right about the drunkard metaphor. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	imbrium 2004-04-06 12:29 am UTC (link)
	Hell, any metaphor involving booze is worth experimenting with, right? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	livii 2004-04-05 11:20 pm UTC (link)
	Hmm, lots of all-around wank there. Yes, FBP was incredibly wanky (if not funny in the sheer pomposity of it) but some of NM's responses were a little over the top too. It's back to the other wank - do we let people fight their own battles? I prefer not, because it always leads to amusing wank... (Reply to this)

	imbrium 2004-04-06 12:29 am UTC (link)
	Leave it to HP fandom to take a review that isn't that wanky, and turn it into a bitch fight. What amused me was the way FBP can use words like "facile" and "parse," can discuss the sophistication with which an author uses language, and yet, cannot spell introduce. (Reply to this)

	nevadafighter 2004-04-06 01:27 am UTC (link)
	I didn't know Harold Bloom was into HP . . . (Reply to this)(Thread)

	fuzzytowers 2004-04-06 04:20 pm UTC (link)
	Yes, Harold and A.S. Byatt quietly wank off while reading Order of the Phoenix aloud to each other every night. They will be reading fanfics in no time at all. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	mariagoner 2004-04-07 03:24 am UTC (link)
	Actually, quite the opposite! The Ol' Bastard Bloom actually hates the HP series, refused to read it beyond the first book, and got into tons of literary wank about it. It's archived in the Fandom Wank archives... somewhere... (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	nevadafighter 2004-04-07 05:39 am UTC (link)
	Oh, I know. My comment was sarcastic. Ol' Wanker Bloom also managed to bash LoTR in the books of collected critical essays he edited. He's probably the biggest pretentious wanker in academia. And he hates Stephen King, too. Actually, I think he hates any writer whose first name isn't William and whose last name isn't Shakespeare. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	mariagoner 2004-04-07 06:26 pm UTC (link)
	The nutter even insulted my perenially loved Vladimir Nabokov while writing an introduction to a series of essays on him. I say we hunt him down! Hunt him down and keeeel the little beeeetch! He deserves nothing less for his crimes against literature and poor, defenseless Shakespeare! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	musette 2004-04-06 01:35 am UTC (link)
	I will never, ever stop laughing at the use of the acronym FAP. It's just too too appropriate. (Reply to this)

	bunny 2004-04-06 02:39 am UTC (link)
	And the wank continues, when someone asks why the thread got locked and the bashed author posts a long, defensive rant. (Reply to this)(Thread)

janegraddell
2004-04-06 04:24 am UTC (link)

the bashed author posts a long, defensive rant.

Pardon me, but...Hunh? Unless the link is leading me to the wrong post, or you're being wittily sarcastic and it's going over my head (always a possiblity), I have to say that I found it neither overly defensive nor a rant. Nor long, for that matter.

The "rant" in question, made in response to a remark by Narcissa Malfoy about "someone" (one presumes she means FBP) making "a hurtful comment":

from tybalt-quin:

I don't know if the comment is hurtful (well, maybe if you like to wrap yourself up in cotton wool ), but it is inaccurate in its portrayal of my fic (specifically the appearance of Fudge as a character in Going Postal is not as pivotal or important as the poster makes out) and I object to having certain false motivations accorded to me as a fanfic author. I'm not going to go so far as to say some of my best friends are politicians (cause that's an obvious lie ), but to label me as "facile, cowardly and scapegoating" simply for the way I portray a character who appears in 2 or 3 chapters of my fic is stretching the point too far.

In addition, the post made in the Order thread bears absolutely no resemblance to the review that was actually given to me by that poster. I had been under the impression that members of the Order of Reviewers were supposed to make their posts based on the content of their review (if I'm wrong then I apologise), however at no point in the review submitted were any of those criticisms in the post raised.

If all rants were like this one, fandom_wank would be out of business. I mean, she didn't even complain about the criticism of the story itself, just the assumptions FBP made about her personally, and that FBP said one thing to her and posted another on the boards. Actually kinda sensible and reasonable, really.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	bunny 2004-04-06 01:46 pm UTC (link)
	If this had been the OoR or her personal review thread, then it wouldn't have been particularly wanky, but it wasn't. The question was if locking the thread was temporary or permanent, which t_q completely ignored to talk about her fic and how wrong this review was. If that isn't "Self-aggrandizing posturing", what is? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

tybalt_quin
2004-04-06 03:16 pm UTC (link)

The question was if locking the thread was temporary or permanent, which t_q completely ignored to talk about her fic and how wrong this review was.

Just as a point of order, I didn't say that the review was wrong. What I said was that the post didn't accord with the review and that the post misrepresented the importance of that character in my fic.

The reason I mentioned GP in the first place was because Narcissa Malfoy seemed to be suggesting that the sole reason the thread was closed was because of the "hurtful comment". If you went to check out the thread, then the only "hurtful comment" appeared to be that made about my fic and I wanted to point out that as far as I was concerned, the comment wasn't hurtful, but it was innaccurate. It's difficult to do that without talking about the fic and explaining why I thought that.

The idea was neither to self-aggrandize or to posture, it was actually to try and ward off any impending wank from people thinking that I was trying to stir up trouble about my widdle feelings getting hurt.

Obviously, it was a crashing success.

In addition, I'm interested in knowing why you're so consumed with trying to make this all about me when the bulk of it was taken up by Narcissa Malfoy and FPB.

t-q

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Defensive much? bunny 2004-04-06 04:33 pm UTC (link)
	The idea was neither to self-aggrandize or to posture, it was actually to try and ward off any impending wank from people thinking that I was trying to stir up trouble about my widdle feelings getting hurt. It was you who closed the thread? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Defensive much? tybalt_quin 2004-04-06 04:46 pm UTC (link)
	No - it wasn't me who closed the thread. I think that Heidi clarified that the thread was closed accidentally by someone looking at the Admin history. Nothing to do with me. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Defensive much? tybalt_quin 2004-04-06 04:48 pm UTC (link)
	Incidentally (and completely off the subject) - that is an adapted League of Gentlemen avatar isn't it? Gotta lurve Royston Vasey. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Been caught wanking... bunny 2004-04-06 04:53 pm UTC (link)
	It is. Isn't it fitting? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Been caught wanking... tybalt_quin 2004-04-06 05:01 pm UTC (link)
	In what sense? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	bunny 2004-04-06 05:09 pm UTC (link)
	Fandom Wank, it's like Royston Vasey in a way. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: tybalt_quin 2004-04-06 05:11 pm UTC (link)
	Ah. Sorry - had a brain fart moment and didn't get it. (heh - almost typed bran fart there). (Reply to this)(Parent)

	BTW bunny 2004-04-06 05:04 pm UTC (link)
	Wrong is synonymous with inaccurate. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: BTW tybalt_quin 2004-04-06 05:15 pm UTC (link)
	Ah (again). I thought you were using "wrong" in the context of "it's so wrong that someone should give my fic a bad review wah wah wah" (which should obviously be a flogging offence). (Reply to this)(Parent)

janegraddell
2004-04-06 05:53 pm UTC (link)

I'm sorry, but once again I have to say, "Huh?"

The content of the first thread was, I'd say, pretty central to the topic of the second thread. Tybalt-quin wasn't even the one who brought up the review. She was, in fact, responding to a specific point made on that thread by another poster, and I'm not sure that it would have been any more appropriate to drag that point into either of the other threads you mention. Not to mention that the actual content of the post is still pretty much lacking in any kind of "self-aggrandizing posturing," at least from my reading.

YMMV, of course, but I'm still coming down on the side of "not really wanky, rather the opposite, in fact."

Sorry for the mess, I'll just mop up after myself here....

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(Anonymous)
2004-04-06 03:24 am UTC (link)

This is the review FBP left on the author's review thread for her story:

This is terrific. When I have time, and I have read all the chapters, I will write a decent review, but, for the time being, I just wanted to put on record how much I enjoyed it. You have officially joined my list of favourite authors (if you don't believe it, check my profile page!).

Now match that one with the review posted at Order of the Reviewers and I think it's pretty obvious why the author was bothered. They're not even remotely the same! I don't think tybalt quin was being wanky at all. If FPB was that bothered by her work, why did she write such nice things in the her thread just to bash her at OotR?

It doesn't make any sense.

--Marah N. (who must get a code)

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2004-04-06 10:26 am UTC (link)
	It may have been posted earlier, before the appearance of Cornelius Fudge... I don't remember, it's been so long since I started reading Going Postal. But anyway... it was a stupid thing to wank over. HP fandom is maybe a little TOO famous for it's silliness. ~Jen, dogatemysocks on LJ (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	tybalt_quin 2004-04-06 11:58 am UTC (link)
	It may have been posted earlier, before the appearance of Cornelius Fudge... Nope - it was posted at the last chapter (25) a good 10 or more chapters after Fudge appears and disappears (I'd be more precise but it's been a long time since I read GP too :)) But I agree - nothing to get incredibly worked up over. Really. Sniff. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	resmiranda 2004-04-06 04:46 pm UTC (link)
	And now the comments section is getting all crusty. Use a tissue, people! (Reply to this)(Thread)

	tybalt_quin 2004-04-06 04:49 pm UTC (link)
	Only if it's got Aloe Vera in it. Mmmmm ... aloe vera. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	janegraddell 2004-04-06 05:56 pm UTC (link)
	Sorry, sorry, all done now. I'll just go fetch a mop, shall I? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Pretentious, moi? azazello 2004-04-06 09:31 pm UTC (link)
	FBP joins the weekly Order of Reviewers thread and posts uber-critical-bordering-on-pretentious reviews. But I thought the whole fandom was about being more pretentious than thou? Or did I miss the point? (Reply to this)