Ebert interview with Esquire

[rknil]

http://www.esquire.com/features/roger-ebert-0310

This one hits home for a few reasons. Ebert is a University of Illinois alumnus, and there was a time when I watched the Siskel and Ebert movie review show fairly often.

Also, (and I wish I were making this up), I was told in August 2001 that an X-ray indicated a jaw tumor. Fortunately, the whole thing turned out to be a horrible misdiagnosis, but it took weeks to get that straightened out, and the only reason it didn't take longer was the Sept. 11 attacks grounded all flights for a time, and I was able to get in to see a specialist.

I also avoided the joy of a biopsy, but we still had to figure out what was showing up on the X-rays. This was not a quick process. In the meantime, the fine, open-minded assholes at The Oakland Press in Pontiac, Mich., decided I was making up the story because I couldn't just give a five-word answer as to what was going on.

I ended up taking a buyout and leaving that paper, and eventually the problem was resolved. I still have to stay on top of the situation, though, in various ways, and I vowed not to allow the problem to get back to the extreme stage.

I'm five pages into the Ebert article, so I'll have to read the rest to find out what happened in his case.   

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76195.msg2750902.html#msg2750902

The Chris Jones worshipers take a hit, as they should. A couple of posts praising the writing are more than sufficient. We get the point.

[rknil]

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/02/roger_eberts_last_words_cont.html

Ebert responds favorably to the Esquire article.

And the worshiping dolts at the sports sites should take note: THIS is how you praise writing. You use specifics, and you sound as if you know how to write.

You don't just make repetitive blanket statements that someone is the BEST WRITER EVER and then dare people to challenge you.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76195.75.html

And -- it's locked.

No surprise. As soon as people started throwing down the BEST WRITER EVER proclamations, the outcome was inevitable.

The flies did stumble upon one interesting topic, though. Do articles like this emerge from innate talent or developed craft? (I added the words innate and developed -- the flies are not mentally developed enough to make those clarifications.)

From what I've seen, I'd say it's a mix of both. Writers can develop their craft if they choose to do so, but too many in newspapers won't put in the time to do so. If they won't even look at a printed version of their story to see what changes were made, then there's little hope for them to improve. With too many alleged writers -- and these are the ones who usually scream the loudest about having "ink in their veins" -- the same changes are made again and again and again.

[rknil]

http://deadspin.com/5482198/my-roger-ebert-story

This isn't too bad. I'm not sure I'd refer to Urbana as "sleepy," though. A few years ago, when I returned to Illinois, I foolishly rented an apartment in an area I remembered from college.

The memories had been replaced by an unpleasant reality -- most of the businesses in the area had closed. The apartment was OK, but I breathed a sigh of relief when that lease came to an end without any serious incidents taking place. The night life in those parts was far from sleepy.

Back to the column -- obviously when you trash someone who has helped you, you are going to have some regret later. Too bad that thought didn't enter Leitch's mind before the hatchet piece appeared.

Sadly, the pattern that led to his attack on Ebert has continued for a decade, albeit not by him. There are any number of all-talk-no-do young folks out there -- Jessica DaSilva comes to mind immediately -- who are all too eager to make fools of themselves. It'll be interesting to see where they are a decade later.