Writer Cat Fight

I used to follow Jones on Twitter. Until the day he started bitching about being snubbed for an award. Wait, check that. He wasn't even up for an award. He was upset about not being nominated. Sorry, Jones, but that says a lot about you. It says that when you finished writing the Ebert story, one of the first things you thought was, "I hope I win an award for this." That's pathetic.

Jones is a sad case. Because instead of realizing what he is -- a solid writer with a good eye for a story who happened to get a few good breaks along the way -- he puts himself in the company of guys like Gary Smith and Tom Junod.

Hey, I know everyone here likes Chris Jones because he used to post here. But everyone likes Curtis Granderson too. Doesn't mean he's an MVP-caliber outfielder. Jones was fine when he was the small fish making it in a big pond. But the guy has developed this Messianic complex to the point where he thinks he can write bullshit like, "The moon tells me what to write."

Scott Raab is 100 percent correct. Sure, Jones, we all like to be recognized for our work. But most of us -- at least those of us secure in our talent -- would never dream of admitting it.

 

I, me, I, me, I, me, I, me, I, me . . . .zzzzzzzzzzz.

Get over yourself. pal.

 

Still figuring out this whole reading thing, aren't we?

 

That's the thing about awards -- Junod wins lots of them and I really hate his stuff because he has to insinuate himself into every article and I just find it annoyingly self-indulgent. When Jones was still on SportsJournalists.com, he and I used to discuss that via PM sometimes. He told me I wasn't supposed to like every Esquire writer, that's not the editor's goal. I can understand that. But, you know, Jones seems to be forgetting this is all very subjective.

 

I'm really not going to get into this, because it's pointless, and it would take me a long time, because nearly every sentence in your post is wrong, but I couldn't resist highlighting your stirring finish. Hey, look, everybody: The great daemon is secure enough in his talent to lie about his ambition.

That's what we should aspire to? Really?

I'd rather be scared and honest about it, thanks, than you, another courageous phony. That was kind of the whole point. Alma got it. Maybe you could give it another swing, Tiger.

 

That was dumb, but at least you were bold with your dumbness.

At least a few people do what they do and take the award if it comes. But they don't obsess about it.

You did add that healthy dash of snark at the end, though.

 

Jones' first entry wasn't a surprise. Anyone who interacted with him here knows that as Scotty once said about Kirk, "He is a man of deep feelings." I've never been a big awards person, but that's for my own reasons, which really don't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Thought Jones' second entry was really interesting. Some would call it inspiring, others intimidating. Others might say it was a bit over the top, but to me it seemed an appropriate entry to highlight the emotions - desperation and fear? - that can keep someone going even after they've accomplished so much.

The responses were interesting as well. Lot of different views about what it takes to be successful. The more I read such exchanges, the happier I am with my career choices.

I don't get why criticism has to be countered with arrogance.

But Double Down and typefitter's responses in this thread, in both tone and content, seem to indicate that the "There are no untouchables" and "Hey, I'm all for fair criticism" stuff wasn't exactly true.

If people like you gentlemen, who are held up as having something special to contribute to this board (writers' workshop, inspiring tales, etc.) react this way, with dismissive one-liners rather than attempts at clarification and conversation, then that whole "This board just isn't what it used to be!" idea becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

Like I said, I get it. Jones used to post here and make everybody feel all warm and fuzzy inside. But the guy could commit murder and some of you would find a way to argue the merit of the crime. His Whitlock post was bush league. His Twitter dispatches that led to his awards post were pathetic. If some of you were really his friend you would tell him that he's making an ass out of himself so he can get back to focusing on his craft and less on himself.

 

I've always felt that the best motivation was knowing that you got the story right.

If it wins an award, then you're lucky to be recognized. But once you expect awards, that's when you start to lose focus and lose control.

 

Some of you -- including you, Piotr, who frankly expected better reading from -- are now twisting was what said into something that doesn't exist. At no point did Chris say he expected an award. He did not as daemon has so falsely claimed, finish the story and say "Yup, award winner." If that is was passes for critical thought, and I'm somehow blowing Jones by poining out how incorrect it is, then it's too bloody stupid to respond to.

 

I can't get into the heads of everyone here -- hell, because of SportsJournalists.com's nature, I really can't get into the heads of ANYONE here -- but sometimes this "I don't care about awards" shit bugs me.

And I'm not talking about the easy route of "if you don't care about awards, you probably never won one." I'm not saying that.

But you can tell me all you want about how it's all about the writing, and awards don't matter, but if it really IS all about the writing, then anybody who says winning a prestigious award to validate that writing and reporting (no matter how subjective the process) doesn't matter a single iota to him or her is, in my mind, full of shit.

"Oh, I won the Pulitzer for my year's worth of writing and reporting on that story, but I don't care."

"I just won the APSE award for the year's best columns in the top circulation category, but it means nothing."

Please.

First, if you really feel that way, I've hope you've refrained from entering, and told your bosses to do the same.

Second, one of the things that drives good writers -- aside from being neurotic, obsessive compulsive, paranoid, or combinations thereof -- is ego. And awards, particularly awards given by peers, feed the ego.

Third, my place had unprecedented success for a place like ours in one writing category this year, and I was thrilled. So were the writers involved. It was a great moment. Why say it wasn't? If we didn't care, what was the point of entering?

I read all of Jones' original post. It seemed a little over the top to me. But he wrote what a lot of top-level writers think but never say out loud.