Comments on: An Amazon-ian Warrior

An Amazon-ian Warrior

rhodri — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 03:26:10 -0800

Amazon-ian Warrior. An unassuming Canadian chap has been quietly submitting ludicrous reviews of products sold on Amazon.com for nearly 5 years. For example, his detailed commentary on George P Joyce's A Comparative Analysis of Two Alternatives to Chemical Aircraft Paint Stripping:

Joyce is an alchemist, taking the leaden medium of technical report writing, and transmuting it with his warm spirit, pouring his pen over the obscured voices of the chemical aircraft paint strippers like a mellifluous caramel gold; redeeming them in a universal chorus of aircraft paint strippers, their individual spirits vibrating like strings in a cosmic harp.

Part of the fun is seeing how many people rated each review as helpful; for example, he gets 100% approval for his comments on Flautist Angel Statuette (This 'flautist angel' is crude, eschewing classical representation to debase itself in the distortions of folk art. A freak frisson of masochism prompted me to order an item that believes human anatomy is modelled upon slurry running from a faucet. Look at it.) while virtually no-one was impressed by his analysis of How Conservatives Won The Heart Of America (Thought-provoking. I did not know that the "heart of America" is an actual item the Conservatives won in a game of squash in 1972; I assumed it was a metaphor.) Since Amazon started adding RSS feeds and enabling comments on reviews, he finally appears to be starting to reach an audience; those wishing to keep updated with his sporadic but fantastic work may appreciate this handy Feedburner URL.

By: slimepuppy

slimepuppy — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 03:53:18 -0800

This is awesome. Thanks.

By: rhodri

rhodri — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 03:56:52 -0800

I'm flattered that I've been elevated to the status of "master of the FPP medium", as this is my first ever Metafilter post. Of course, it's possible you're taking the piss, which is equally flattering, ha.

By: lastobelus

lastobelus — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 04:07:18 -0800

This reminds me years ago there was an absurdist Amazon reviewer I used to follow...damn, I wish I could remember his name. He was no less erudite, but somewhat more risque.

By: johnny novak

johnny novak — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 04:12:26 -0800

lastobelus Henry Raddick is probably the guy you're thinking of, he was pretty big back in 2001 or thereabouts.

By: johnny novak

johnny novak — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 04:17:30 -0800

as featured previously on Metafilter.

By: loquacious

loquacious — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 04:17:56 -0800

Also, before anyone snarks rhodri into a smoking crater, be kind. They're apparently a journalist, so just go a little easier on them, ok? We can afford to make small allowances for those that are a bit slower than us. More seriously: nice post. I love this kind of stuff. Such fascinatingly mundane subversion, so pointless and pointed at the same time.

By: rhodri

rhodri — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 04:22:29 -0800

Sorry for the "read more" omission. You know how it is when enthusiasm overtakes syntax. And yes, being a journalist doesn't help one bit.

By: A Thousand Baited Hooks

A Thousand Baited Hooks — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 04:28:13 -0800

Heh. Reminds me of this eBay reviewer. I'll bid on you til there's nothing left but crumbs! Then I'll bid on the crumbs

By: milarepa

milarepa — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 04:50:00 -0800

very nice post.

By: Kattullus

Kattullus — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 04:59:39 -0800

Oh my. These reviews are amazing. This sentence, from his very helpful review of Rod Stewart's Still the same, floored me: When I watch Rod Stewart on my videocassette deck, I put him in slow motion. The folds of his pumpkin orange face move like pond ripples away from his mouth, and slowly break over his closed eyes.

By: rhodri

rhodri — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:12:00 -0800

I know, I know. And there's so much to choose from. The drywall saw one I particularly like: This is a very noble drywall saw. It takes a firm command of the drywall and tidily administers to it with such dignity - a trait I find boorishly lacking in most other drywall saws. The patrician cast, and venerable blade make it a dignified and baronial addition to your workshop. I myself feel a workshop too ignoble a home for this drywall saw, and have instead mounted it above my fireplace where its eminence can be more proudly displayed.

By: killdevil

killdevil — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:18:50 -0800

Awesome.

By: killdevil

killdevil — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:23:50 -0800

On Ann Coulter's How To Talk Like A Liberal (If You Must): Taking her inspiration from some of the developments in language studies within humanities departments since the 1970s, Anne Coulter unearths the sedimented contigency of many oft prattled 'truisms' with a Derridean alacrity.

By: Chocomog

Chocomog — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:24:52 -0800

Reminds me of the 2% milk reviews on Amazon. I wrote how it turned my puppy into a bloodthirsty beast.

By: lastobelus

lastobelus — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:35:51 -0800

@johnny novak yeah, that's the guy. Although he doesn't seem as funny to me now as I remembered...

By: disgruntled

disgruntled — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:37:44 -0800

Most excellent post.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 06:49:13 -0800

Reminds me of the David Hasselhoff reviews.

By: jeyoung

jeyoung — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:44:12 -0800

Do these reviews signal the emergence of a new form of literature? The timewaster literature? Reading through these reviews, I cannot help making the connection to The Timewaster Letters.

By: jason's_planet

jason's_planet — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:45:14 -0800

For the Rosetta Stone Basic Italian: As with any language learning system, one is going to come up against a tendancy towards the most basic and rudimentary forms of communication the language offers. Unfortunately, all of my experiences in Italia were not well serviced by this product. On numerous occasions I found myself needing to say "Do not escort me to your hovel. I am a man of taste", and "your odour is corrupt." I suppose this is the experience one expects while exploring the Italian countryside, but never again will I find myself speechless when needing to say "Your peasantry here is of poor stock, barely suited even for the luxuries of feudalism."

By: orange swan

orange swan — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:52:24 -0800

unassuming Canadian This is default mode for Canadians. I'd love to see what this guy could come up with David Hasselhoff's music. Since there's so much scope in that and all.

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:56:40 -0800

unassuming Canadian This is default mode for Canadians. Oh please stop this before you turn us into Apple computers.

By: i love cheese

i love cheese — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 08:02:46 -0800

Another great Amazon reviewer of olden days was Smith T. Aames, who had written dozens of reviews that were eventually deleted by Amazon. Blogger Bizarre Journali later admitted that she was Smith and has posted a number of her original reviews: Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith My Friend Leonard Sweet Sue Torso 98 Degrees and Rising Metamucil etc... Also noted by, bloggers, far, and, wide

By: iconomy

iconomy — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:13:03 -0800

I agree about the drywall saw review - that's just...wonderful.

By: oddman

oddman — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:25:17 -0800

This is the best I can say about the reviews: I started reading them and sometime later, much later, I remembered that I had other things to do. Excellent and engrossing. Thanks, rhodri.

By: cribcage

cribcage — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:41:06 -0800

As others have pointed out, this has been done. The first time, it was really funny. But I think the only way it continues to be entertaining by the time the sixth person comes along is if you actually subscribe to the ludicrous notion that posting prank reviews on e-commerce websites is some new form of art — which apparently many of you do, so, OK then. In my book, here's a guy ripping off somebody else's idea and snickering over a thesaurus to write the sort of self-amusing prose that most of us submitted for assignments in junior high school.

By: ashbury

ashbury — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:13:19 -0800

It's not theft if it's any good. It's borrowing and making it better. Many musicians have gone on record as saying that they borrow many aspects of their music from other musicians. How is this any different? Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

By: mek

mek — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:32:49 -0800

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:43:56 -0800

The first time, it was really funny. But I think the only way it continues to be entertaining by the time the sixth person comes along is if you actually subscribe to the ludicrous notion that posting prank reviews on e-commerce websites is some new form of art Tsk. Tsk Tsk. Au contraire. One of the secrets of comedy is repetition. Which is part of timing. Mysteriously it usually works best in odd numbered sequences. Curly, responding to Moe's incessant attempts to gouge out his eyes and pinch off his nose, oft refrained: "Woob. woob. woob!" or "Nyuk. Nyuk. Nyuk." By your logic a simple lone "Woob" or "Nyuk" would have sufficed. Now. Any stooge (pardon the pun) can see it simply will not do. Thrice makes nice. "Woob woob." See that doesn't work. Sounds needy. Uncertain. "Woob. Woob. Woob. Woob." Well. Now your just pandering. "Woob. Woob. Woob. Woob. Woob." HAHAHA. Now that is comedy. Your making fun at your earlier attempts. Kudos to you sir! This hater attitude speaks more to your own failure of ability to appreciate a true "Fools" consistency. Many children grow easily bored. Most often it's an attention span problem not a content problem. If this Mister Quickly keeps up with his antics I say in five years he will be hailed a genius. Haters be damned. It is also ironic that most of the haters are the de facto reviewers here. In the sense that MeFi's very existence depends on the smarmy and over informed personal "review" of the minutiae of the web.

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:45:14 -0800

Wait for it.

By: meech

meech — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:01:29 -0800

Nice post rhodri. I love Amazon reviews, just yesterday I came across Arthur an autodidact who is looking for a new career: What I learned is that aerospace intelligence is not as difficult as you would think it is What impressed me most about Arthur was that across 100 reviews his average rating is 5 stars. I admit I was envious, I wish everything in my life was 5 stars. Arthur on the DVD Ohio Surges On: I had no idea that Ohio was this interesting.

By: Ynoxas

Ynoxas — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:02:58 -0800

tkchrist: I actually laughed out loud at your "Woob. Woob. Woob. Woob. Woob." . Something so firmly ingrained in my mind that just the reference to reminds me of laughing on Saturday morning 25 years ago. Thank you.

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:13:22 -0800

Woob! Repetition!

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:33:15 -0800

Thank you. And you are welcome. Ps. My earliest memory of the Stooges, one to this DAY get's me in stitches, is when they ran a Diner. In Morocco! So, of course, they wore fez's. The entire absurd reason to set the gag in Morocco. THAT alone is funny. Especially since Curly kept having his fez stolen by a monkey and had to wear the monkey's teeny tiny fez. So they run this Diner. And the special is Clam Chowder. Ok. Now how funny is that? Clam chowder being the special in a Mediterranean coastal nation in North Africa. Being only seven years old it took me a while to get that one. Anyway. Clam chowder. The problem is Larry didn't shuck the clams like Moe told him. So these big mean looking Arab guys kept busting their teeth on the clam shells. So Moe, being always customer service conscious, sends Curly out to "take care" of the clams. Curly goes to this table. The customer was all "This Chowder is impossible to eat, you infidel dog!" Curly lifts the bowl up to look in and a clam surfaces and squirts him in the face. SPLOOSH! "Woob. woob. WOOB! Wise guy, eh!" So Curly reaches into the bowl and the clam bites down on his finger. SNAP! He pulls it out and it jumps up and bites his nose and goes back into the bowl. "OW wooob!" Curly goes and gets some tongs to fish out the clam. He gets in a tug of war with the Clam. Back and forth. Back and forth. The bowl has magically become like five feet deep. He climbs over the Arab. In the back and forth struggle he gets the Arabs beard all caught up in the tongs and the Arab ends up face first in the bowl. "Don't worry sir. I wont let a mollusk molest us!" Says curly. So curly disappears off screen for a second. Comes back with a huge gun and begins SHOOTING into the bowl of chowder. BLAM. BLAM. BLAM. After a few shots a tiny little white surrender flag appears in the bowl. Curly bows to the Arab and presents him the bowl. "Your chowdah sir!" And the clam squirts him again. ------- Repetition my friends!

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:39:35 -0800

PS. I also find that Stooges episode oddly and presciently analogous to the US in Iraq. Somehow.

By: rhodri

rhodri — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:56:38 -0800

In my book, here's a guy ripping off somebody else's idea and snickering over a thesaurus to write the sort of self-amusing prose that most of us submitted for assignments in junior high school. I see plenty of sites that claim to be funny. I've read the Timewaster Letters and similar books, right back to the Henry Root Letters in the 1970s... I'm not claiming the idea is new – he's just a really good writer. Thesaurus doesn't even come into it. If it did, I'd see it a mile off.

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:12:24 -0800

rhodri - don't sweat it. That guy IS funny. This: to write the sort of self-amusing prose that most of us submitted for assignments in junior high school ...is a dead giveaway. See the complaint here is that the complainer is so much smarter than anybody who finds the subject funny. See he supposedly actually USED a thesaurus to write "prose" in middle school. And by saying "most of us" that's implying anybody at age 12 that didn't is left out here in dumb-land. Knowing full well that "most of us" didn't use a Thesaurus much in Jr. High (ages 12 to 14) nor even know what real "prose" was. Let alone write it. So the complaint accomplishes three things. It states: A "I'm smarter than the subject." B "I'm smarter than anybody else who enjoys the subject." C. "I am easily bored." What it does not accomplish is any examination of why Mr. Quickly is, or is not, funny. Mr. Quickly IS funny. I hope MORE people do what he is doing.

By: cribcage

cribcage — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:29:50 -0800

If you're finished with, "You don't like what I like, so you suck!!!", then maybe you'll notice that I explained exactly why I don't find this stunt funny: It's derivative. Lots of people have done the same damn thing. It was funny the first time, and now it's not. It's interesting that you leapt onto, "He thinks he's smarter than me!", because I never said any such thing. I think it's ludicrous if somebody believes this is some new form of art, but that's quite different from just saying that you're amused by it. Whatever insecurity led you to interpret my comment as an attack against your intelligence, I think it's interesting how many folks take personal offense at the notion that somebody disagrees with their assessment of what's funny.

By: The Card Cheat

The Card Cheat — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 16:11:00 -0800

"Art" is pretty much any creative endeavour undertaken in a spirit of expressing oneself. It doesn't have to be intelligent, or edifying, or suitable for framing in a museum. Therefore, these reviews are "art". It's relative merits are, of course, fair game for debate, but if there's one thing life has taught me, it's that one man's laughter is another man's annoyed grimace and that there are few debates more futile and tedious than those over whether something is funny or not.

By: The Card Cheat

The Card Cheat — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 16:29:16 -0800

While we're on the subject of amusing online reviews, my personal favourite would be the lead IMDB review for MVP 2: Most Vertival Primate. An excerpt: "This movie made me smile, it made me think, but most importantly it made me think I was smiling."

By: Deep Dish

Deep Dish — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 16:59:55 -0800

All I know is, that the way I leave ebay feedback will never be the same

By: damn dirty ape

damn dirty ape — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:02:40 -0800

Heh. Reminds me of this eBay reviewer. The scary thing about that guy is that he mostly left messages for users named becky. I love one ends like so: becky9( 147Feedback score is 100 to 499) no longer a registered user

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:25:08 -0800

God, I HATE taste arguments. Cribcage: Knock it off. You're KILLING me here. You don't have to like what I like. In fact. I would warn you against it. I would not join a club that would have a guy like me as a member. QUOTE you:" I think it's interesting how many folks take personal offense at the notion that somebody disagrees with their assessment of what's funny" Why is it people get so defensive when you prove their critic is merely a claim of false superiority? Dude you are doing exactly what you claim we are. Let me quote you again: "if you actually subscribe to the ludicrous notion" Why is it ludicrous? And "to write the sort of self-amusing prose that most of us submitted for assignments in junior high school" So. We were ment to take you litterally? How can we. You would do well to post some verifiable examples of how MOST Junior High students using this supposed thesaurus cop'd verbose "prose" you say is so common. And then. Explain how " the use of "ludicrous" is not a knock to people who may enjoy this guys writing. Or you could admit you were being unintentionally insulting and self superior. It's ok. I do it all the time. I merely, if given the time to think about it, would have phrased my critic differently if I were you. As for not being original? Ok. Sure. He is not original. Big deal. that has nothing to do what so ever if something is funny. Or even meritable as art. Depending on how ripped off the source is. And this I would not classify as a rip off. Rather a genre of sorts. BTW. I can, I GUARANTEE you, find a lack of originality in half of what you DO like. Go ahead post ten of the funniest things you can think of. Let us pick them apart for originality. After all: Good poets borrow; Great poets steal. Originality is good. But not required for humor. In fact - as I mentioned - sometimes it's COMMONALITY, anticipation and repetition that MAKE things funny. Sometimes when there is nothing else recognizable to the structure of the humor it is it's original nature that surprises us. Another factor in timing. But there is room for everything. The other reason I like the guy is that he is making fun of reviews and critics as a concept. Which I endorse, heartily. As I think reviewing is largely a parasitic form of wannabe-ism for the less talented and gutless. Everybody is literally a critic. But, eh, that's just me.

By: cribcage

cribcage — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:37:29 -0800

I HATE taste arguments. ... Knock it off. You're KILLING me here. That's more than a bit disingenuous, followed as it is by your 425-word screed; but it's good advice nonetheless, and I think I'll take it.

By: redteam

redteam — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:47:33 -0800

Wow, this guy's hilarious. Maybe it's because I'm reading Mark Twain right now (just read Innocents Abroad and Roughing It), but does anyone else feel that these reviews are written in a style like Twain's or at least in a Victorian style?

By: zapatosunidos

zapatosunidos — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:48:25 -0800

The neat thing about art is it doesn't matter if you are good unless you ask someone to pay you for it.

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:59:46 -0800

followed as it is by your 425-word screed You counted! You care. You really care! Hardly disingenous. In fact I went to great lengths to explain why. you simply ignored all of it so you could feel like a smarty pants. You get all keyed up and then you run home and take your toys with you without even attempting to address a single point I made. I hate these arguments because THAT is how they always end. And frankly THAT is your right in matters of taste. So scuttle off. As will I. The neat thing about art is it doesn't matter if you are good unless you ask someone to pay you for it. Kind of like sex.

By: cribcage

cribcage — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 18:44:47 -0800

Oh, for Christ's sake. Hardly disingenous. When you tell somebody, "Knock off this stupid argument," and then you proceed to continue said argument — that's disingenuous. Insincere. Hypocritical. See aforementioned thesaurus. "Knock it off," you wrote. You hate taste arguments. This one's killing you. Et cetera. And I agreed — because you're right about "taste arguments," and so is The Card Cheat: they're futile and tedious — so I walked away. And now you call me a coward because I 'failed to address your points.' And that's the trap of hypocrisy, obviously: If I had ignored the first part and answered your "points," you'd have repeated your haughty exasperation at the fact that I insisted on continuing this stupid "taste argument." How clever.

By: ashbury

ashbury — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 21:00:20 -0800

Last word!

By: empath

empath — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 22:20:23 -0800

your favorite amazon reviewer sucks.

By: lumpenprole

lumpenprole — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 23:51:34 -0800

Okay, this guy's hilarious. Yeah, I've read this kind of thing before, but this is just great humor writing. This review of a panasonic cd player made me snort wine out of my nose: "While I was initially attracted to this product for the sterling glamour of its silvery surface, this soon tarnished once I began operating its more than yielding button interface. Yes, it is very generous in how it allows you to press and poke it to command a number of operations; but it is almost too generous, and with each push of a button it sinks into disrepute, servility and debasement. I once esteemed its silvery resplendence. This product now impresses me as nothing more than painted chattel to be abused by paupers and mendicants, to daub with their oily fingers. I can have no more of this disreputable product."

By: nickyskye

nickyskye — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 01:35:32 -0800

Definitely a +favorite post! Am looking forward to reading more of Mister Quickly's (gender twist on Mistress Quickly?) silly fun. Thanks rhodri.

By: Bugbread

Bugbread — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 02:07:50 -0800

It's funny. And derivative. And unoriginal. And my bet is that he was aiming at "funny", and not "original and underived". So he probably succeeded at what he was aiming at. And I found it funny. I didn't find it original, or underived. But I enjoy funny things, both original and unoriginal. So it's cool, we're on the same wavelength.

By: redteam

redteam — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 04:20:24 -0800

If you don't think he's funny, fine, but I don't understand all this "derivative" talk. Like only one person in all of history is allowed to make a fake review ever? Everyone else who decides to do the same thing afterwards, whether they arrived at the idea on their own or not, has their efforts branded as derivative? I've seen this done before, and this guy's much funnier than the others, he has a very nice style.

By: inoculatedcities

inoculatedcities — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 08:10:26 -0800

These are somewhat funny. Amazon reviews are usually so irritating -- I sometimes wonder if Laura Ingraham is exhorting her hateful, retarded army to "review" Chomsky books en masse in the interest of making America more ~~ignorant~~ proud. I usually ignore then, except when my ultra-mega-Zionist friend with the erudition of a third grader, Jill Malter chimes in -- she's ranked reviewer #138 on all of Amazon! I think she "reviews" about thirteen books per day. Whether or not she reads any of them is another question.

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:13:47 -0800

so I walked away. And now you call me a coward because I 'failed to address your points.' AH HAH!. You DIDN'T walk away. How did I know you'd come back? I KNEW it. Because you HAVE to prove your smarter than everybody. Prediction fulfilled. Tkchrist: 3. Cribcage: 0. BTW. I didn't call you a coward. So I won't call you a coward now. Sure. I AM a hypocrite. I guess. But a hypocrite with at least a sense of humor. There are worse things than being a hypocrite. Like. Say. A being a humorless hysterical pompous douche bag. So I might call you a humorless hysterical pompous douche bag. Might. If you get nasty. Won't THAT sting.

By: squarehead

squarehead — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 19:58:33 -0800

Using a "camera" to "film" people "doing stuff" and then "projecting" it on a "screen" in a "dark theater". That's been done so many times. And you idiots are still falling for it.