Saturday, April 07, 2007

The Devil is bad

It seems that Matt Sinclair enjoyed my defence of political blogging.
This defence of blogging by DK is absolutely brilliant. He defends political blogging as the beautiful, varied mess that it is and should be. In particular, he is right to note the importance of links to sustaining a proper debate.

I am sorry to tell Matt that he is completely mistaken; your humble Devil thanks Matt for his compliments, but my piece cannot have been any good because—in an article entitled Worst Fisk Ever?, which lays into my recent (admittedly lacklustre) Brown pieceTom Hamilton, of the pretentiously-named Fisking Central (who put these guys in charge?), decides that I have never written anything good.
I wonder if the swearwords are actually a brilliant way of disguising general rubbishness. If you object, you look like the kind of square who objects to swearing, rather than the kind of square who objects to bad writing and bad argumentation.

To be fair, Tom's points are absolutely pertinent; it was a lazy and incoherent fisking that I probably should not have bothered with.

In my defence, I don't generally look on pieces like that as a proper "fisking": they are really just a stream of insults to assuage my rage at the Gobblin' King's generally evil and incompetence. But I do concede most of Tom's points. But, he hasn't finished yet...
"Under the swearwords there are some fantastic arguments", he claims. Well, that's not quite true. "Under the swearwords there are some rubbish arguments" appears to be closer to the truth. It may, I guess, be true that "Under the swearwords and the rubbish arguments there are some less rubbish arguments and the occasional link to something else worth reading". But, really, why would you bother?

Who knows? It seems that Tom is probably another Kamm, a self-important tosspot who seems to imagine that I write my pieces for other people. Or, indeed, that there is any artful motive behind the swearing: as I have repeated many times, I was just angry and found my voice.

At the end of my Kamm piece, I wrote the following sentence:
Besides, at the end of it all, your humble Devil did not look for power through blogging, only catharsis.

This still holds true for any appreciation of my writing; obviously your humble Devil is pleased and flattered that people see fit to read, link to and comment on my ramblings, and I am always happy when people are persuaded, or even forced to think about their position, by the arguments that I put forward (and from my email Inbox I know that some have been).

At the same time, I would like to point out that I was writing this blog for four months before I got a link (from the estimable ChickenYoghurt) and eight months before I put a counter on. The point being that if my readers deserted The Kitchen tomorrow, my outpourings would continue because I enjoy writing them. Besides, I still enjoy all that I learn from the others that I read and that even includes Tom Hamilton's fisking of myself.

Anyway, that's enough navelgazing for a while: time to check the news and see what the hell's been going on now...


Longrider said...

It seems that Tom is probably another Kamm, a self-important tosspot who seems to imagine that I write my pieces for other people.

Well, that made me smile. Some folk just take themselves far too seriously.

David Farrer said...

The Devil is bad

Not much point in being the Devil if you can't be bad now and again...

Oh yeah? So what has happened for the last ten years, exactly?

Over at the ASI, they are posting some of the winning entries of the Young Writers on Liberty. One does not want to put such keen minds off,...