See the post above for my support of Pierre Fournier of Frankensteinia for the blogging award from Rondo. But if I may bitch for just a second...I have some blogging buddies, four in particular, not nominated that should have been. See, what bugs me is that there are 25 nominees and yet no room could apparently be found for Arbogast on Film, Love Train for the Tenebrous Empire or Billy Loves Stu. Cinebeats wasn't nominated either and even though I have always viewed Kimberly's excellent blog as a period blog rather than a genre blog (Kimberly doesn't focus on horror any more than I do) she still writes about it as much as some of the nominees and, well, she's better at it and has more passion than most of them put together so I say, "Nominate her!"
But I also want to say this about Arbogast on Film, acknowledging that this in no way takes away from my love for Kimberly or Pax or Kate and the excellence of their blogging pursuits: Arbogast of Arbogast on Film is one of the best goddamn writers out there! One of the best writing about film you will find anywhere, in fact. His insight, style and wit are wonders to behold and if an entire group of horror fans can't muster up enough intellect to see that then to hell with all of them.
Seriously, the blogs nominated make for some good reading and good analysis but next year, dammit, can we get some freakin' love for Arbo, Kate, Pax and Kimberly please?!
36 comments:
The thing about Arbogast is this: when most film writers decide to take a left field turn on a film and explore stuff that you know damn were never intended by the filmmakers, it becomes a pretentious, self-indulgent exercise in smugness. When Arbogast does it, however, and he does it a lot, you think "Wul, shit...why didn't I see that?" And then the movie becomes better (or worse, depending). He doesn't take writing about movies lightly.
That's a good way to put it. He takes it seriously. He can put up three humorous posts in a row (which in and of themselves are genius) and then get down to brass tacks with a full-on movie review and blow you away with his take on the movie in question.
And not for nothing, he can turn a phrase like few other writers out there.
Yes. And not to slobber over the guy too much (because he really is kind of an asshole) but the best example I can think of to illustrate what I'm talking about is his "31 Days of Screams" post on BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, where he talked about how the Bride's life lasts about two minutes total, and the first thing she does in her time on earth is scream in terror. That's the kind of film writing that actually adds power to the film, whether Whale thought of it or not, and not in some dry, academic, bullshit way.
His "31 Screams" is kind of a thing of a beauty because he's taking a visual, aural event and talking about it using only still images to convey the scream. He does an amazing job with that every year.
I agree with everything said about him here (except the "kind of an asshole" thing - he's never been anything but charming to me) and while I think most web awards are a little ... Geocities, the Rondo is different. He deserves the recognition.
I wholeheartedly agree about Abrogast, the man is one of the most talented guys out there.
(except the "kind of an asshole" thing - he's never been anything but charming to me)
That's Bill for ya (he's kind of an asshole).
Dania, I love your description of most web awards being so "geocities." Geocities was my first ever encounter with personal websites and I still think of them (and all those damned framed pages people would do) as being the height of glorious cheese.
And Pax, you wholeheartedly agree about yourself too, right? Your screenshot character classifications on women in horror is stupendous!
Arbogast knows what he did.
Not to interrupt the Arbo lovefest, since I totally agree, but just to bring on an alternate point.
In some ways, I think the thing you say about Kimberly's blog does actually hurt her in things like this... I think it's rather epidemic.
I remember when I was considered a "horror blogger" by many - I never cared for it, and always fought it, to the extent that I almost never write about horror anymore - and it was like a community almost followed without effort, "Hey, this guy writes about horror movies, I'll put him on my blogroll and whatever..."
And the same goes, it seems, with any niche. It's easy for the mediocre to rise, as my example demonstrates, which is part of why I read so much less niche stuff and how much the one's I do still read, bringing it all back to Arbo, stand out for me.
Super kind of you, Greg! I was really surprised that I was nominated last year since I don't focus on horror exclusively. I don't think Arbo qualifies because he's blogging incognito. If he came out of the shadows I suspect he would be. Of course I'm just guessing but that seems like a reasonable explanation.
I lot of my favorite bloggers are nominated this year and I hope one of them wins it.
And what about putting in a word for yourself? I love your month long tribute to horror during Halloween!
Generally speaking I find all these blog awards sort of dubious and a bit hard to take seriously. People campaign HARD for the Rondos and they campaigned HARD for the Total Film awards that I somehow got nominated for this year. I'm always just really surprised to be nominated and I have no idea how to make the hard sell that the winners so often do. Maybe the next time I'm nominated for anything I should take out some ads like Melissa Leo did this year for the Oscars? I'll wear a faux fur coat and paste the words "Consider" over a picture of myself by the local YMCA pool and post it all over the www.
Neil, I do know what you mean. So many movie bloggers are accepted as movie bloggers, period. Like Bill Ryan or Marilyn Ferdinand or Rod Heath or Ryan Kelly or Jim Emerson, etc. Others of us have been put into a category. I've seen Cinema Styles on enough "Classic Blog" blogrolls to know that I'm considered a "Classic Cinema" blog.
Because of that, for the first couple of years I felt like I couldn't write about anything outside of classic cinema. I did, really. I felt pressured to never write about current releases. The pressure was all imposed by me, of course, but it was there nonetheless.
Then, a couple of years ago, I just decided I shouldn't pressure myself over something so absurd and wrote about whatever I wanted, which has worked out well for me. I still cover plenty of classic film so I don't think I'll lose that niche label anytime soon, I just don't worry about it anymore.
Maybe the next time I'm nominated for anything I should take out some ads like Melissa Leo did this year for the Oscars? I'll wear a faux fur coat and paste the words "Consider" over a picture of myself by the local YMCA pool and post it all over the www.
I already did that and I didn't get one damn vote! And I even let some skin show!
As for Arbo being anon, he's been nominated twice before so I don't think they care about that but who knows, maybe they do now. I personally am rooting for Pierre, whose blog I plug up above. Frankensteinia is simply amazing! It's like a Frankenstein library. He really deserves to win.
I already did that and I didn't get one damn vote! And I even let some skin show!
Maybe the wording was wrong? Instead of "Consider" you should try adding "Why the Hell Not?" or "There Are Worse Nominees."
Pierre's an inspiration and Frankensteina is a treasure!
Maybe the wording was wrong? Instead of "Consider" you should try adding "Why the Hell Not?" or "There Are Worse Nominees."
I also considered adding, "Come on! Look at my ass. Not bad, right?"
Still, not a vote.
"Kind of an asshole?" Goddamnit, Bill, can't you take simple dictation. I distinctly said to call me "King of the assholes." Christ!
Greg (and all who commented, except for Neil, who interrupted the Arbo love fest), I am deeply touched (I'm talking prostate stroke) by your words but all I can say is - isn't it silly? I remember being nominated the first year I started, when I'd been at it (well, AoF anyway) for 4 or 5 months. I knew then not to take it too seriously.
I'm very fortunate to be paid to write about movies - rewards don't come any better than that.
Okay, Neil, too. As Gloria Swanson said in that movie about that street, "Let's not be petty about such matters."
"Say, Arbo, didn't you used to be big?"
"I still am big, it's the blogs that got small."
Yes, I'm sure there is no reason to take any award seriously but still, it's a limited award, given for horror/fantasy and the nominees for blog in this area run up to 25 total nominations and still no room for the four of you? That's ridiculous.
Yes, of course -- rah, rah, rah! and all that. But I'd be curious to know, Greg: as the Rondo nominations are open to everyone and culled entirely from submissions by fans, who did you suggest as nominee(s) for best blog?
It seems a little strange that none of the people commenting here decrying the Rondos for not nominating their favourite writers ... bothered to nominate their favourite writers. Or, honestly, any writers.
Just sayin'.
The process for nominating blogs isn't, as I understand it, as open to the public as the process for voting for them. I've been asked in past years via e-mail to contribute nominees but this year I was not.
I'd also like to state for the record that I've never nominated or voted for myself.
Wilbur, I thought my post made clear that I found the omission of the blogs I listed as a great oversight but also stated, "Seriously, the blogs nominated make for some good reading and good analysis..." So if you ask for my immediate solution, it would be that there either be a listing of all blogs recommended for nomination, even if that's 100, and people vote for their favorite, or no nominations but simply, from everyone's submissions, the blog that got the most is the winner. Having a "write in the blog of your choice" under a list of nominees is ineffective because most people just choose from the list.
It seems a little strange that none of the people commenting here decrying the Rondos for not nominating their favourite writers ... bothered to nominate their favourite writers. Or, honestly, any writers.
Just sayin'.
And thus, we lose the right to complain about the nominees, right? But that's a non-sequitor fallacy, i.e., one does not follow the other. The outcome about which I was complaining did not nor does not hinge upon my desire to vote or not, simply that once I was made aware of the outcome, I found it lacking. Whether or not I have the power to submit a vote to nominate doesn't matter.
I understand the idea of saying, "Had you voted maybe they would have been nominated." You're right, that is a possibility but by focusing on that, as your comment did, you are avoiding the main issue which is, of those who did nominate, some of the best blogs were not chosen.
Besides, I'm writing a personal post about blogging friends not getting nominated as a show of support for them and I get hell for that? Goddamn.
Now I hate this post.
I hate everything so I've got you beat.
Greg, honestly, I wasn't trying to give you hell. If you're perceiving any animosity in what I wrote, I hope you'll accept my apologies.
But this:
And thus, we lose the right to complain about the nominees, right?
But of course!
I'm guessing you misunderstand how the Rondos work. For about nine months preceding the awards, there is an open CHFB thread wherein any and all recommendation for nominations are taken, from anyone who suggests a worthy contender in any one of the awards' categories.
Regarding one part of your "solution" -- there IS a list of "all blogs recommended for nomination". It's the list of nominees!
It would've been as simple as your making a post -- a single post! -- recommending any -- or all! -- of the blogs you're praising here, and they would have made the list of nominations for best blog.
If the work of your friends, and their being "overlooked" by the Rondos, is important enough for you to write such a personal post about, I don't understand why you didn't take the time to make sure they got the recognition you feel they deserve.
I can't possibly disparage the work you're doing to promote the admittedly wonderful work your friends are doing, but ... the "Rondos Got It Wrong" sentiment is misplaced, since not one single fan of any of the admittedly excellent blogs you mentioned did anything to make sure the Rondos had a chance to get it right.
word verification: epoup
(Which is kind of what it feels like I'm doing on you blog, but I swear it's all good-natured!)
I'm guessing you misunderstand how the Rondos work. For about nine months preceding the awards, there is an open CHFB thread wherein any and all recommendation for nominations are taken, from anyone who suggests a worthy contender in any one of the awards' categories.
Wilbur, I thank you for returning but I think there's a miscommunication here. In argumentation, there is a causal fallacy in which one assumes that if another did not affect change then one has no validity in impugning the result. This is a fallacy because one does not lose the right to disagree with the result of something that one could have ostensibly taken part in with not guarantee that would have changed it.
You keep engaging this. "Aha! But you didn't vote!" No, I didn't. Further, it doesn't matter that I didn't. I didn't even know voting was open until I received an e-mail from Max Cheney. I then saw the results of what was nominated and filed my complaint here. That is what this post is and the disagreement is valid whether one has participated or not.
Regarding one part of your "solution" -- there IS a list of "all blogs recommended for nomination". It's the list of nominees!
There were only 25 total blogs recommended? That I didn't know. So anyone recommending any blog automatically gets it a nomination? So next year, if I simply list 10 or 20 or 100 favorite blogs, they will all be nomintated? I'm asking honestly, is that how it works? Someone simply says, "I think this blog with two posts should be nominated," and it is? No one is filtering out anything after the fact?
If that is indeed the case that's good to know. Thank you for that.
Boy, you never know with Bill, do you?
Arbogast is the worst writer on this side of the Internet.
... decrying the Rondos for not nominating their favourite writers ...
Strange. I really feel like I'm living in an alternative universe lately whenever I go online.
I thought Greg's original post was just a lighthearted and funny follow-up to his passionate "Vote for Frankensteina" post so could slap a few of his blogging pals on the back. And I completely missed all the other comments "decrying the Rondos." I see a couple brief and casual comments about not much caring for awards in general (from me) and the nature of cliques in the horror blogging community (from Neil) but that's all I see. I must need new glasses.
Oops! Apologies for the double post, Greg. Feel free to delete the one with the less spelling errors.
I wish Greg would delete the posts where I praised Arbogast. I really regret writing those.
Bill is in the zone now!
Wait a minute, Bill, which side of the internet are you on? I'm on the East side of it and on this side, he's the best. You must be on the West side. I hear over there they've got writers who spend months tearing themselves apart over every word. Man, there are some fucking great writers on the West side.
Kimberly, I like the italics in your first comment so I kept that one. Who cares about typos anyway? Maybe Arbo or Bill but what do they know?
And thanks for your support, fair Kimberly. I really hope that's over. I was just writing in support of you guys and I know Wilbur was just writing in support of the Rondos (and Wilbur, I understand that) but I was just bemoaning the fact that of those who did nominate (and, yes, we all admit, I didn't!) they left off some of the best. Like you.
Bill in the zone? Please.
I am late to every party, and apologies for not getting here sooner to say a very heart-felt thank you for the mention, Greg! I was nominated for a Rondo last year and it was lovely to've been noted in that list. I feel more than sufficiently loved :) But yes--totally agreed with the Arbo/Pierre/Kimberly lovefest. They're an incredibly inspirational group of writers!
Well, now that Wilbur has explained the nominating process, by which, apparently, if anyone says, "Nominate this blog" it gets nominated, I will make sure you are all nominated next year.
And, I still need TO VOTE for Pierre! Must do that before I forget.
Post a Comment