The Simmons Site

Chris Jones doesn't do it for you? No love for Chuck Klosterman? Dave Eggers? Malcolm Gladwell?

 

Yeah, even if you don't like those guys, it's safe to say that they're pretty notable.

 

They're good writers. I enjoy their work for the most part. Never really read Eggers; the others you mention I enjoy.

But they are not Ralph Wiley, David Halberstam, and Hunter S. Thompson. Wiley was an original Page 2 columnist; not sure on the others. Point is that Grantland is just a Page 2 do-over.

I read Simmons' two pieces on there. Nothing different than his regular ESPN.com stuff (or Page 2 stuff). I am a big fan of Klosterman's work. His first story on there was just a story. Haven't read Jones' yet. Though Andy Greenwald's HBO purgatory column wasn't even true (he completely ignored Christopher Merloni and Michael Imperioli).

They've got a long, long way to go before they even get to the level of Slate or Salon. I expect more of an attitude or vibe from Grantland than what's there right now. So far it's just stuff that would fit right in anywhere else.

 

I've just skimmed most of it, but I thought the Andy Greenwald piece on HBO recycling character actors was pretty clever and well-done:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/6635619/the-hbo-recycling-program

 

Read Jones' piece ... awesome.

Read Simmons' piece ... too damn long. Like someone said earlier, way too many words. I stopped reading after all his facts.

 

Grantland strikes me as an answer for a question nobody has really asked since "The National" went out of business. You know, the one about whether the marketplace can support "literary" writing that just happens to be about sports. I know for a fact you can lose a shitpot full of money trying to explore the answer to that question. No doubt about that.

Now, the whole notion of longform journalism is making a big web-based comeback, surely, but in some ways that's also an invitation for the sort of self-indulgent work that, one might argue, has quickly emerged in this particular vanity project writ quite large.

Who's the target audience? Those of us who post on SJ? Are there potential readers who think the problem with sports is that there aren't enough people, even if we're taking Jones here, writing about the AL East? That we needed one more voice chiming in today about LeBron?

Is this supposed to be McSweeney's for sports, maybe? Will they print one issue on a shower curtain?

I'll give the thing the benefit of the doubt, and I'm for anything that throws money at sports writers, but it's a puzzle to me at this point. Like one of those dishes at that five-star restaurant in Spain that looks like an egg but turns out to be a solid foam of tuna and mushroom. Nice trick, but most folks want a burger.

 

Great post by HejiraHenry, especially the part about the 'solid foam of tuna and mushroom.' Agreed, most folks just want the burger.

But about The National, because folks keep drawing a comparison and I can't see it:

For me, The National was never about 'literary writing.' It was just great writing, immediate and relevant, by writers who were already rock stars in their own markets. And it failed largely because the distribution was a nightmare...not because people didn't like the content.

I know there are numerous National alums here, would be curious to get their take.

 

That's my concern. There's long-form writing, and there's long-form navelgazing.

Love that.

 

More HH, less BS.

 

There should be a tshirt.

 

To your "self indulgent " point, Jones uses "I" 100 times within his story

Simmons uses "I" 33 times.

Does not detract from my high regard for Jones piece, but if he continues on this pace he will need to replace the "I" key on his keyboard.