tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post2890885000639221892..comments2024-03-27T21:47:38.050-07:00Comments on stevereads: In the Penny Press!Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-58104289304858783762010-12-10T18:33:22.361-08:002010-12-10T18:33:22.361-08:00Great writing! I want you to follow up on this top...Great writing! I want you to follow up on this topic!!<br /><br /> Dionne<br />http://highwayinsurance.infoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-1162214884984052242008-10-12T18:06:00.000-07:002008-10-12T18:06:00.000-07:00Thanks for posting this article and opening it up ...Thanks for posting this article and opening it up for discussion. I have read the GQ article so many times, it fascinates me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-8865142199323879392008-03-20T11:08:00.000-07:002008-03-20T11:08:00.000-07:00It's happening, people. This is REAL. Have a loo...It's happening, people. This is REAL. Have a look...<BR/><BR/>http://cbs4.com/local/marathon.stingray.woman.2.681445.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-50801903670667757742008-02-07T12:18:00.000-08:002008-02-07T12:18:00.000-08:00I know Sullivan very well and know for certain tha...I know Sullivan very well and know for certain that none of the instances of animal attacks were fictionalized. Is there any question as to how good a writer Sullivan is, that now the Washington Post is writing about this piece? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/04/AR2008020402772.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-26253427347930327952008-02-01T06:57:00.000-08:002008-02-01T06:57:00.000-08:00"back when you and I were first having fun in a pu..."back when you and I were first having fun in a public forum"<BR/><BR/>Um, for the record, Steve and I did NOT meet in a park restroom.<BR/><BR/>Just wanted to be clear about that.Locke Peterseimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05320507157893341941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-3707981109790473922008-02-01T00:01:00.000-08:002008-02-01T00:01:00.000-08:00Uh... Steve, I think the bulk of your regulars wer...Uh... Steve, I think the bulk of your regulars were born, say, a decade or more before 1986. At least, me, Jeffy, Beepy, Locke, even dandy ol' Sebastien...Kevinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00289597293731183865noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-84064141154425269482008-01-31T23:28:00.000-08:002008-01-31T23:28:00.000-08:0086 or 84 - doesn't matter! everybody here - with t...86 or 84 - doesn't matter! everybody here - with the exception of Beepy - wasn't yet BORN in any case, back when you and I were first having fun in a public forum! How different the world is now, and yet how alike! And WE'RE still here! Life, as I insisted to you back then, is good!stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00411174345391126343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-84200636520541273182008-01-31T20:13:00.001-08:002008-01-31T20:13:00.001-08:00But just to be safe, I'm surrounding my bed with p...But just to be safe, I'm surrounding my bed with pots of boiling water.Locke Peterseimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05320507157893341941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-61303136077433084062008-01-31T20:13:00.000-08:002008-01-31T20:13:00.000-08:00Wait, the lobsters want my PANTS? Huh?Oh yeah -- t...Wait, the lobsters want my PANTS? Huh?<BR/><BR/>Oh yeah -- they're GQ lobsters!<BR/><BR/>Sadly, I fear my pants would not be cool enough for GQ lobsters...Locke Peterseimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05320507157893341941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-65329220929756875932008-01-31T19:50:00.000-08:002008-01-31T19:50:00.000-08:00Just you wait until the lobsters come for YOU, sma...Just you wait until the lobsters come for YOU, smarty-pants! THEN you'll see!stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00411174345391126343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-78731702791395501072008-01-31T19:49:00.000-08:002008-01-31T19:49:00.000-08:00Or did everyone else get that the article is a jok...Or did everyone else get that the article is a joke and that Steve knows it's a joke and I'M the one not getting it (that is, that everyone gets it)?<BR/><BR/>(Oh, and it's been 22 years, not 24. That I've known Steve -- spring of '86, not '84. I just thought I should clear that up -- you know, for when they forge the commemorative plaque.)Locke Peterseimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05320507157893341941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-42150782860391729952008-01-31T17:22:00.000-08:002008-01-31T17:22:00.000-08:00I've known Steve for 24 (!!!!) years and to this d...I've known Steve for 24 (!!!!) years and to this day I still have trouble figuring out when a) Steve doesn't get the joke or b) Steve gets the joke, but pretends NOT to get the joke in order to provoke responses from others who get the joke and think Steve doesn't.<BR/><BR/>For starters, Steve does sometimes have a bit of trouble seeing things in their context. Plus, given its subject, it's obvious he very much WANTS this story to be true. Whether or not he really believes it, well, there's where I have to shrug.<BR/><BR/>Secondly, because he is well over 300 years old, Steve still remembers a time when slick fashion magazines like GQ and Esquire mattered for their journalism, essays, and fiction. They don't anymore. They still have plenty of amusing or distracting stuff in them, but Steve probably still assigns them much more credence and gravitas than they deserve. <BR/><BR/>That said, the GQ article is a joke. A hoax. A funny. It's like the Jurassic Museum of Technology in LA -- it's performance art, in this case, meta-fiction.<BR/><BR/>It doesn't matter one whit whether the animal attacks are real or not -- that's not the point and it's not the joke. Nor is the joke as simple as an attempt to hoax people into believing there's a connection between the attacks. And it's not a just goof on Stephen Glass. (It might also be a bit of a goof on global-warming alarmists.) Mostly, it seems to me, the author and editors' intent is to goof on the idea of Internet pseudo-science, on the fact that massive information-communication hootenanny that is the Interwebs naturally lends itself to this sort of thing: people soaking up too many random facts and then venturing into the very dangerous waters of Trying To Make Sense of Them All.<BR/><BR/>I don't doubt the attacks happened (though, intern-free myself, I am not going to try to track them all down), and I don't doubt Sullivan found someone online who's postulated the theory that They Are Ganging Up On Us.<BR/><BR/>But what I see the piece as is one of those bits of writing that bubbles up when a writer and his editors spend so much time generating story ideas, chasing down increasingly wacky leads in hopes of finding that elusive new, sensational story. So what you end up with is a meta-work that says "Here, you want a sensational story?! You got it! It's not really true, but that's the danger of the information world we live in these days."<BR/><BR/>The author does not believe these attacks are signs of a worldwide animal uprising. He does not believe the "real" Livengood model he found online is credible or even sane. He seems, to me, to be making the point that if you wallow too long in the murky depths of the World Wide Web, you're gonna get a little waterlogged.<BR/><BR/>And looking back over Steve's entry, I think now he does get the joke -- his reference to the "craven" GQ editors probably tipped his hand a bit.<BR/><BR/>Sullivan is having us on. Steve is having us on. I am the only speaking the truth to you all. Now send me all your money and canned goods.<BR/><BR/>And Rachel Bilson? Eh, cute but not really all that. She's no Anne Hathaway.Locke Peterseimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05320507157893341941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-65619203438572420422008-01-31T13:46:00.000-08:002008-01-31T13:46:00.000-08:00I know the writer of the essay, and I know that no...I know the writer of the essay, and I know that none of the animal attack info was invented. There are fictional elements in the piece, but none of the hard-to-believe animal stuff, including the 200 dogs, was made up.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-55332043933854820002008-01-29T18:12:00.000-08:002008-01-29T18:12:00.000-08:00That whole scenario seems even less likely than al...That whole scenario seems even less likely than all of the Europeans banding together to take over the continent.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-15886114073424576512008-01-28T18:20:00.000-08:002008-01-28T18:20:00.000-08:00It wouldn't have required even all those people: i...It wouldn't have required even all those people: if the American Indian tribes who were here when the first waves of colonizers started arriving had a) accepted this for the enormous, overwhelming danger it represented and b) stopped their own internal squabblings and banded together across a common front, they could have completely prevented the European expropriation of North America, at least until the developement of warplanes.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00411174345391126343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-217924406333029102008-01-28T09:39:00.000-08:002008-01-28T09:39:00.000-08:00Do you think it's really true that if the slaves, ...Do you think it's really true that if the slaves, American Indians, and poor whites had banded together they could have overwhelmed the rest of the colonizing population? Beyond a lots of early victories in the form of massacres, I don't see how this could have been. The US was never a little island like Haiti. It seems like a matter of long-term resources, weapons, industry; guns and steel and all that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-58611658409257659852008-01-26T22:23:00.000-08:002008-01-26T22:23:00.000-08:00I loved this article. It was so well paced. The ...I loved this article. It was so well paced. The chimps using spears unsettled me the most. Turns out to be pretty well confirmed. You can see video of a chimp ... almost... using a spear here: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070222-chimp-video.htmlstoners.manualhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12117895973264418226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-4123158963692028592008-01-26T21:23:00.000-08:002008-01-26T21:23:00.000-08:00But also, apart from the aforementioned GQ cover (...But also, apart from the aforementioned GQ cover (which would arouse just about anybody, gay, straight, hermaprhodite, undead .. you name it), I take it you liked the entry?<BR/><BR/>Or was it just the pachyderm sex, you old dog?stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00411174345391126343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-73035143788366950842008-01-26T21:21:00.000-08:002008-01-26T21:21:00.000-08:00Brian, welcome to Beepy's world.Brian, welcome to Beepy's world.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00411174345391126343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32302521.post-13180543828511100402008-01-26T18:30:00.000-08:002008-01-26T18:30:00.000-08:00Steve, this is the first time I've ever been arous...Steve, this is the first time I've ever been aroused by one of your postings. That's all.brianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02735195151662028189noreply@blogger.com