Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wombat]

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/cartoonlounge/2008/07/an-interview-wi.html

Uh, slight exaggeration there, I think this is "Achewood on the New Yorker website." I will double check this if this week's issue ever gets delivered.

But maybe you kids today don't make sure fine distinctions.

[CortJstr]

This was basically unreadable.

[wombat]

I thought there was some funny stuff in it. But it reads like it is an unedited email interview, which is not a good thing.

[MrCB]

Clearly writing and drawing the Wedding Arc has robbed him of what remained of his sanity.

As far as the comic goes, this can only be a good thing. Interviews, not so much.

[wombat]

Goddam, the guy just tries way to frikkkkin' hard on the internet persona sometimes, y'know.

Right. This is why editing is a useful thing. The blogger could have made that interview into a very amusing piece by using just the best parts. But I guess he gets paid the same if he just copies and pastes the email into a post.

[Turbo Ninja]

Right. This is why editing is a useful thing. The blogger could have made that interview into a very amusing piece by using just the best parts. But I guess he gets paid the same if he just copies and pastes the email into a post.

I am hopeful Onstad will read the blog and understand how purposely "random" he sounds.  Then he will realize that his comments were not edited for coherence, clarity or wit and he'll do better next time. 

At least he was more cooperative than Nicholas Gurewitch.

[dejavroom]

This was basically unreadable.

Yes. Ugh.

[wombat]

Then he will realize that his comments were not edited for coherence, clarity or wit and he'll do better next time. 

Speaking as one who is in the business, that's not normally the interviewee's job. Unless the guy made it clear that he was just going to copy the whole email into the blog, I don't blame Onstad.

[Bobby Isosceles]

This was basically unreadable.

TL;DR so I didn't have to face that problem, blissfully.

[jaydub]

That read like one of the Onion's lame "Ask A ..." columns.

[Cap'n Squeakers]

I thought it was pretty funny. Clearly, neither he nor the interviewer cared about being "serious," they were just goofing.  Do you honestly want to read boring answers to normal questions?  Bah, I say.

[pmcd9]

Speaking as one who is in the business, that's not normally the interviewee's job. Unless the guy made it clear that he was just going to copy the whole email into the blog, I don't blame Onstad.

He pretty much says that several times in the interview.

[wombat]

Yeah, but it sounds like he's joking, you know?

Of course, for all we know, there was even more un-funny meandering stuff that he did edit out.

[pmcd9]

I don't know how anyone can find any pleasure in watching someone get dressed down by an asshole like Gordon Ramsay. 

What we need more of is less people like Gordon Ramsay, Simon Cowell, Donald Trump, etc...

[wombat]

I don't know how anyone can find any pleasure in watching someone get dressed down by an asshole like Gordon Ramsay. 

Onstad misses locking threads at Dumbrella. Watching an asshole yell at people on TV is as close as he can get to reliving it.