We Interrupt This Laughter

Every few weeks John Scalzi is accused of being so popular he can unjustly influence the outcome of an issue vital to the science fiction field. Take his frequent appearances on the final ballot of the Hugo Awards, for example. The Hugos are exceptionally vulnerable to this sort of thing because the nominees tend to be works people actually like, the very thing John writes. Oh, fie upon you, John!

What’s worse, John has such fun playing off the swirls of controversy occasioned by his popularity that, darn it, he comes off as even more likeable. I thoroughly enjoyed the latest example, Slavering Hordes! I Command You to Take This Poll!

Please stop it, John! How can we make room for the more deserving works if you insist on attracting rather than repelling fandom?

However, John’s critics might want to pay attention to the results  of that highly scientific poll which show the writer’s sway over his minions may have been overstated:

The current results of yesterday’s poll suggest that only three percent of you are blindly willing to do my bidding, but that 30% might be willing to do my bidding if there’s cake involved.

The takeaway for John’s critics? Stop griping and start baking!

Discover more from File 770

Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.

9 thoughts on “We Interrupt This Laughter

  1. Well, Gary, I hate to have been too obscure for you. In plainer English: today I laughed when I read two posts on John Scalzi’s blog. No brag, just fact. It could happen to anyone. Maybe even Adam Roberts.

  2. I have it from an Unimpeachable Authority that John Scalzi (1) ruined fandom, (2) is responsible for fallen armpits, (3) distims the doshes, (4) isn’t even from Phoenix, and (5) is the true heir to the Ted White Group Mind.

    Clearly, he’ll have to be killed. Paging Steven Brust.

  3. Mike, I’m sorry to be so dumb, but maybe I was obscure: it’s your comment “Then we’ll know you’ve been getting advice from The Crotchety Old Fan?” that I don’t understand, and your responding that you laughed twice at Scalzi’s blog (perfectly understandable) doesn’t seem to help me understand what you meant about Steve Davidson at all. What “advice” are you referring to?

  4. Gary, for a brief season the Crotchety Old Fan tried to attract more traffic to his blog with references to bacon and/or Scalzi. I was reminded of it by Mike Walsh’s question about adding bacon to the cake.

    Perhaps “taping bacon to the cake” will become the 21st century counterpart of “gilding the lily”?


  5. “Gary, for a brief season the Crotchety Old Fan tried attract more traffic to his blog with references to bacon and/or Scalzi.”

    Did he go as far as suggesting taping bacon to Scalzi? Or taping a cat to Scalzi?

Comments are closed.