Bill Doskoch: Media, BPS*, Film, Minutiae :: Read Carl Wilson in Saturday's Globe

Main Page

Media

* Big Picture Stuff

Minutiae

Twitter faves

Film

Politics

CAJ-L postings

Photos

Admin

Cambodia

This Month

Month Archive

October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005

Year Archive

2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004

who employs me

I am a staff writer with CTV.ca News. That operation is part of CTV News, which is of course nestled into CTV Inc. and CTVglobemedia.

I don't speak for my employer on this blog. I don't comment about the internal affairs of my employer.

Any views expressed here are my own.

Main Page

Previous:	If it sounds to good to be true ...
Next:	Steve Earle on Cindy Sheehan

Read Carl Wilson in Saturday's Globe

by billdoskoch on Sun 28 Aug 2005 03:26 AM EDT | Permanent Link | Cosmos

Why? No particular reason, except that he seems to have crawled up the ass of one W. Kinsella and started gnawing on said W.'s haemorrhoids by writing critically about Fury's Hour, Kinsella's new book about punk rock, triggering a rather frenzied response.

Here's an excerpt from Kinsella's blog (posting made on Aug. 27):

Check out this pompous moron in today's Globe. A buddy of mine who edited this Wilson guy's stuff at the Globe told me he's a poseur, that he's a prissy arsewipe, and that he'll be insanely jealous of my book - and, ipso facto, that he'd try and figure out some way to rip it. My buddy was right, it seems!

What's most amusing about this Moron-With-A-Thesaurus^TM is his naked desire to impress someone, anyone, with how very clever he is. I mean, referencing Freud in a column about rock'n'roll? "Warholian" impulses? Golly, Toto, we're not in Kansas anymore - we're stuck inside some loser's need to impress his black turtleneck readership at OCA!

I don't know Wilson personally, but I like his writing, and back when I was associated with globeandmail.com, I traded a few emails with him on this and that, and found him to be an approachable, helpful and gracious guy to deal with.

Trust me when I say I have no use for pompous morons, and Wilson didn't strike me as being that kind of guy.

So why the hysterical, ad hominem nature of Kinsella's attack on him?

Did I get Wilson wrong, or did Wilson simply bite into one of W.'s nerves?

Note: Here's Wilson's blog: Zoilus.

Posted to:

Main Page

Minutiae

Comments

Post a comment

Re: Read Carl Wilson in Saturday's Globe

by patrickbyck on Sun 28 Aug 2005 07:49 AM EDT | Profile | Permanent Link

I would think that it is the latter. W. Kinsella doesn't necessarily disagree with people when he posts, he simply attacks them. Flaming David Miller was the most vitriolic example prior to the Wilson tirade. As a reaction to criticism (warranted or not), it's tiresome at best.

There is probably some credence to of what Kinsella is saying though, as Wilson' use of phrasing such as "...tin ear for punk's Dadaist paradoxes", and phrasing of that ilk are, however novel, comes off as pompous.

Seems awfully similar to two pre-schoolers burying each other's heads in the sand.

Re: Re: Read Carl Wilson in Saturday's Globe

by billdoskoch on Sun 28 Aug 2005 11:54 AM EDT | Profile | Permanent Link

It might well be pompous (certainly, my knowledge of art history is sufficiently limited as to make me very careful about using phrases like "Dadaist paradoxes"), but what I want to know is: Is the thought Wilson expressed correct or incorrect?

If he was wrong, then the poseur label might be deserved.

Telling me that someone told him Wilson is a prissy arsewipe, among other things, isn't reason enough to discount his opinions on Fury's Hour.

If Kinsella wants to flame people at an exceptionally high temperature, especially when they're right ... well, it's his blog and it's his credibility.

Re: Re: Re: Read Carl Wilson in Saturday's Globe

by patrickbyck on Sun 28 Aug 2005 01:35 PM EDT | Profile | Permanent Link

Like you, my understanding of "Dadaist paradoxes" is not that strong, so in terms of the accuracy of that particular statement by Wilson, I cannot say either way. It's not the accuracy of that particular statement that interests me though.

What I find telling is that rather than support by example why Wilson is a "prissy arsewipe" (by citing other work that he was critical of), W.K. resorts to a trust-me-a-buddy-told-me account of why Wilson is "jealous". It's a flimsy and blatant attempt to destroy someone's credibility, in addition to being ineffective.

Wilson may have been harsh in his criticisms, but I have to agree with Nestruck, in that he was "clearly wanting to engage the book because of who Kinsella is, rather than what the book was about."

Personally, it seems that W.K. wants to take ownership over an entire era of music and will simply not entertain a counterpoint to his own interpretations. It's a myopic view, to be sure, but once a fighter always a fighter. When you're attacked as often as he is, perhaps you tend to assume a defensive stance. Perhaps it becomes difficult to rid yourself of that mindset and entertain other logical arguments (Freudian or otherwise).

Re: Re: Re: Re: Read Carl Wilson in Saturday's Globe

by billdoskoch on Mon 29 Aug 2005 02:17 AM EDT | Profile | Permanent Link

Well, in Kinsella's case, what makes it especially distasteful (if not hypocritical) is his quoting of anonymous sources to take shots at Wilson, given earlier this summer, he went on a rant on his blog about someone who took an anonymous shot at him.

So publicly quoting anonymous shots from alleged colleagues is OK?

But upon re-reading the column, I think Mr. Wilson made the conscious decision to play with a rattlesnake (a different way of expressing Nestruck's view). His column did personally criticize Kinsella, not just knock holes in the book.

If I was Kinsella's communications adviser, I'd still say his response was over the top, but hey -- I'm not. :)

Post comment:

Format Type:
	Convert newlines
	Receive comment notifications for this article
Subject:

Comment:

Comment verification:

Please enter the text you see inside the graphic to post your comment:

You are not currently logged in. If you would like your user information to be displayed with your comment, please enter your login information below.

Username:
Password:

If you would like to post contact information on your comment, please enter your information into the optional fields below:

Contact information:

Name:
URL:		example: http://yourdomain.com
Email:

Please note: email will not be displayed on the site, only for the blog owner. If logged in, URL will only be used.

email this blog

Don't have a reader account, but still want to commend/castigate? Send an email.