Skip

February 8, 2002
3:42 PM   Subscribe


 
Well she needs to look a little harder, because there's lots out there. I have two little pieces of crap (1,2) I try at, and there's a hell of a lot more talented folk than I out there. (1,2,3)
posted by owillis at 3:49 PM on February 8, 2002


Shouldn't this be a link in this thread?

What's wrong with someone making an observation that things are recycled. I've noticed everywhere. Everything I see in movies, on TV, in the news is the same thing from 10, 20, and 30 years ago. I don't read enough blogs to be bored by them, but if someone made the observation, so be it. I'm not going to argue with Meg's personal observation on her personal site.

See also, these A List Apart articles from way back: one and two.
posted by mathowie at 3:50 PM on February 8, 2002


"That which has been is what will be,
That which is done is what will be done,
And there is nothing new under the sun."
(Ecclesiastes 1:9)
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 3:53 PM on February 8, 2002


But that's the problem Matt. People don't try and seek out new stuff, instead they prefer to label everything new (or a lot of it) as no good without even sampling it. How many times have we seen here on Mefi someone posting that after 199X all the music sucks?

It just reminds me of generation after generation wistfully looking back on themselves instead of taking a chance and sampling from now.
posted by owillis at 3:59 PM on February 8, 2002


One might argue with its fitness for Front Page Post status though, if one were that type. I do find it ironic that this comment itself, and my reply to it, are far too common. But there is plenty of great stuff out there. Everything is boring after a few times around. Second albums after great albums (almost) always suck, because they are (almost) never as different as the first album was from what you had heard before it. In the same light, if you keep reading the same sites for long periods of time, the patina of newness wears off. You have to always keep looking farther and farther if newness is what you are after.
posted by donkeymon at 4:08 PM on February 8, 2002


oh there's plenty of stuff out there that's new and cool. i usually have to load up metafilter to find it tho. :D
posted by jcterminal at 4:13 PM on February 8, 2002


Owillis, I hate that music thing.
I don't want to meet the lazy sack of protoplasm that can't find good music nowadays.
posted by dong_resin at 4:15 PM on February 8, 2002


Sturgeon's Law.
posted by twitch at 4:17 PM on February 8, 2002


"It takes two to complain about weblogs: one to complain, and another to post the complaint on MetaFilter."
-- Henry David Thoreau

posted by Shadowkeeper at 4:24 PM on February 8, 2002


A stunningly original observation.
posted by mattpfeff at 4:30 PM on February 8, 2002


This would have been a more appropriate link if you wish to start an real discussion on recycling material on the web, along with the rest of our culture...
posted by crog at 4:32 PM on February 8, 2002


"We must study History so that when we play Doom we will know when we are repeating it"

-- Me (when I become a history teacher and try connect with the little urchins and fail just like my History teacher did)
posted by srboisvert at 5:10 PM on February 8, 2002


owillis: 199x? Hell, music has sucked ever since 19xx!
posted by geneablogy at 5:16 PM on February 8, 2002


Weak thread. Link a throwaway comment with no supporting material in a post with no background material. I know that if I say it, it'll end up in MetaTalk, but...

Pancakes anyone?

btw, I like not.so.soft, it was the first blog I ever read and one of the few I read regularly. Still, this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, in'it? I mean Meg's site isn't really cutting edge.
posted by eyeballkid at 5:28 PM on February 8, 2002


There are so few responses to MetaFilter posts that are original these days. Everything seems recycled, plagiarised, stolen, or just flat mental. Especially when ZachsMind posts. The dweeb.
posted by ZachsMind at 5:43 PM on February 8, 2002


There are so few responses to MetaFilter posts that are original these days. Everything seems recycled, plagiarised, stolen, or just flat mental. Especially when ZachsMind posts. The dweeb.
posted by dong_resin at 6:17 PM on February 8, 2002


Yes I know I made this same exact joke in the plagiarism thread. Yes I know it hasn't gotten any funnier with age.
posted by dong_resin at 6:17 PM on February 8, 2002


This just looks like she's saying "everything on the web is crap. that's why you should read MY NEW SITE"

Sister, self-absorbed ranting is one of the most burnt out ponies running on this track ...
posted by hipstertrash at 6:24 PM on February 8, 2002


For those that don't care to go past the initial glance at her site the Important dialogue is featured in her comment thread. Where some insightful things were said by many (myself included).
posted by KnitWit at 6:37 PM on February 8, 2002


a recycled, revisited and repackaged comment (all of three sentences long) generates 42 comments on a weblog. the thread explains why meg was correct.
posted by moz at 7:03 PM on February 8, 2002


Get your heads out of the sand. Things have been copied since the start of time. There's no such thing as creating something 'new.' Everything is inspired.

You can track almost anything back to its inspirations. Floyd were inspired by The Beatles. The Beatles were just a development from the early rock'n'roll era. Early rock'n'roll was basically just jazz or 12-bar with electric guitars initially. Jazz was inspired by slave music, African music, as well as contemporary 'classical' music. And so on.

Nothing is new. Only your ignorance of what came before makes things seem original.
posted by wackybrit at 7:07 PM on February 8, 2002


If you don't like what's out there, take it as a personal challenge to exceed it.
posted by dhartung at 7:09 PM on February 8, 2002


wackybrit,
That is true - except in the case of Limp Bizkit, who have single-handedly invented and inspired an entirely revolutionary approach to the craft of song.
posted by glenwood at 7:59 PM on February 8, 2002


And the bloglash continues.
posted by darukaru at 8:15 PM on February 8, 2002


Would it be against the law to laugh at glenwood? :)~
posted by oh posey at 8:31 PM on February 8, 2002


"craft" of "song"? WTF?
posted by verdezza at 9:55 PM on February 8, 2002


Sturgeon nailed it. And not-so-soft is further proof, like we needed it.
In related news, the remake of Rollerball opened today. Maybe I can find an old review of it to plagiarize or recycle.
posted by StOne at 10:27 PM on February 8, 2002


I heard they cloned a sheep.. How's that for recycling?
posted by crog at 10:29 PM on February 8, 2002


Please tell me no one thinks glenwood is serious. Time to dust off those sarcasm meters folks.
posted by mathowie at 11:02 PM on February 8, 2002


Uniqueness and originality are everywhere. They are merely unable to survive transformation into presentational media. They necessarily become derivative, because, to be seen at all, they must inevitably present as constructs whose building blocks are limited to Universal Legos, Com Set 2002.
posted by Opus Dark at 11:58 PM on February 8, 2002


I thought recycling was a good thing. I still try to separate out the cans, and wash the spaghetti sauce off my glass jars, so that D.C. sanitation can carefully throw it all into the back of the same truck.
posted by moth at 12:01 AM on February 9, 2002


I am going to write a trend piece about how there are lots of crappy trend pieces these days.

Seriously, observations that a good idea (blogs, the web, fucking anything) is often copied badly is like saying water is wet.
posted by McBain at 1:09 AM on February 9, 2002


And the bloglash continues.

I still have Cushlash. ("Tell me you didn't sign with Bob Sugar, because I am still kind of moved by that 'word stronger than oak' thing").

As long as J-Lo and JaRule keep teaming up, all is right with the world.
posted by McBain at 1:12 AM on February 9, 2002


Heya - Meg has asked me to post this, since she seems to be having trouble signing onto Mefi for some reason -->

________________________________________

Before anyone starts ranting about how unoriginal
and lame my original comment on my personal site
was (oops, too late), can I just point out that while
this may well be a case of the pot calling the kettle
black, in this case I know I'm a black pot - and I'm
pretty much ok with that.

I'm as guilty and innocent as anyone. I am influenced
by things, I recycle things, I pick up on trends and fads
and memes - and once in a while, maybe I even start
one, but not usually intentionally, I have to admit.

My comment was never about putting myself on a
different level to other personal publishers, and neither
was it me having a go at the phenomenon. In fact,
I don't think I actually said that recycling and duplication
was a bad thing at all.

I'm not down on blogs, blogging, personal
publishing or anything else. This isn't about me,
you or anyone else. I simply noticed a phenomenon
- I commented last month in a similar style on the
circular nature of bad hair fashion, but no-one
posted it to the front page of MeFi - and mentioned it
on my personal site. And then it shows up here, with
my motives, personality and site picked apart in public.
The world has truly gone mad.
________________________________________
posted by barbelith at 7:42 AM on February 9, 2002


Meg, is there such a thing as a personal site? Obviously, there is, but if it's online, ya gotta expect something like this to happen from time to time. It's all part of the rehash of life. FWIW, I think that most people agree with you, despite some comments to the contrary. I hope you haven't been offended too much!

I don't remember who said it or even what exactly was said (yeah, I'm a big help): a novel is can have one or more of five plot lines: love, death, sex, betrayal, sin, ......

I don't remember the rest and I'm horribly misquoting. If anybody can fix this, feel free. The point is that if life is a constant repetition of these themes, there will always be times when we get bored of it.
posted by ashbury at 8:32 AM on February 9, 2002


I think the picking apart taking place here, Meg, means just about as much as your criticisms, and will be remembered for just about as long.
Blogs are kind of a spleen-y media.
posted by dong_resin at 1:05 PM on February 9, 2002


Hmm. Meg is having trouble logging in? The Smiting hath begun...
posted by Opus Dark at 4:52 PM on February 9, 2002


Damn, Meg, now I feel guilty; it wasn't your fault your brief entry got FPP'd. You weren't trying to produce a substantive essay on the topic, which I guess is what some of us thought we'd find by following the link. And your blog--while it's not to my own offbeat tastes--is better than a lot I've run across.
I don't think much of my own attempts at blogging either, but I'm proceeding on the assumption that neither will anyone else. We Internet users are always hanging KICK ME signs on each other. I've been flamed by email by someone who took the time to tell me what a dumbass I am, but though it stung at first, catching me unprepared, I chilled-out: SFW/BFD, life goes on. Sticks and uh, stones, you know...
"Roses are red, violets are blue, your blog sux but mine does too." I won't even link to it here where self-linking is semi-legal (or at least not a capital felony). Just take my word.
posted by StOne at 11:29 PM on February 9, 2002


I'm not sure I expressed myself too clearly above. I do like the notsosoft blog, and, as far as I can tell, Meg as well, I just don't think anyone will remember any of this in a week or so.
Such is the nature of pancakes.
posted by dong_resin at 12:09 AM on February 10, 2002


« Older Enduring Freedom: The action figures   |   Is it Live or Is it Moronic? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post