I would like to preface this Wespeak by saying that I wholeheartedly believe in the steps this page is taking to eliminate personal attacks. Personal attacks are irrelevant to the larger Wesleyan community, especially when they are self-satisfying in jokes better settled with a fight club membership. I, however, deserve some recourse (I have promised the Wespeak editors that I will hit about the belt: no blows to the mother or manhood).
Two weeks ago, the Ampersand ran a piece by Stephen Aubrey entitled “The 8-Year-Old Film Critic”. I found it patently unfunny, but good-natured enough. Still, Max Goldblatt had done something eerily similar in a much cleverer fashion last year. So as a wrap-up to my film critic column, Critical Ass, I wrote a playful, self-deprecating warning to the 8-Year-Old Film Critic.
Sadly, my article was long enough already and the Argus felt that the warning was irrelevant to my film column. I had no problem with this. Somehow, the Ampersand and Aubrey got a hold of the clipped warning (somebody might have a girlfriend who is an Executive Editor). Regardless, the result was a featured piece by “Stevie Aubrey” in past Tuesday’s Ampersand, “Return of the 8 year old Film Critic” with a very conspicuous, marred picture of me. I would not usually read the Ampersand, much less respond to it, but when they are scraping the bottom of the barrel by attacking me and my column based on something that was not even printed just to get publicity, my interest is piqued. I am flattered but something is seriously wrong and needs to be addressed. I also must correct a frightening misconception that people think I wrote the piece as a shameless plug. If I were to do that sort of pandering, I would hope that I could get more than the one or two chuckles the piece inspired.
When did the Ampersand become so pathetic? Underneath the 8-year-old poser is a piece by “J Ro” in which he acts very pleased with himself because a angry Wespeak was written in response to his last piece. J Ro hopes to repeat this “success” by offending as many people as possible. Has the Ampersand become a personal attack message board? Is that humor? Some of the Ampersand is not even comprehensible anymore (bizarre spam mail piece in same issue that was guest edited by Stephen Aubrey). The Argus should step in and edit this section, extend the commitment to quality from the Wespeak page to the Ampersand. Right now, the Ampersand is third rate blog drivel. There is a reason nobody will write for it except for the editors and Aubrey and that I can’t even find the section in the Argus archives.
Though I am of the opinion that Aubrey and his writing do not deserve my time, I will respond to one specific part of Aubrey’s hack rant: Do not tell me how to write a review based on esoterica you read in Entertainment Weekly. I know that stuff too, but the great thing about my mind is it has an editor. An obscure Britcom will not help people understand Shaun of the Dead better. I have said all along that I will not stand for “film major types jizzing their personal doctrine all over the pristine pages of the Argus.” So why should I stand for a COL major?
This is why I will not dignify any further challenge to me you make with a response. You have a good scam going already even being printed in the Argus, so don’t jeopardize it. Plus, I don’t want you getting even more attention on my behalf. After this, I am done. Write something back. I won’t respond. Y’all wanted publicity, you got it. You won’t keep it, Aubrey, because everybody will skim your page 3 column and forget it instantly no matter what persona you take on: 8 year old, Woody Allen knock off, etc. These same people will continue to not read the Ampersand.
Look at what you’ve done to me. I’m usually so easy-going, and you drew my ire. For future reference, the 20-year-old film critic can deprecate himself, thank you.
Aubrey, be grateful I have not parsed your column. Tupac said it best in “Hit ‘Em Up”: “You aren’t even on my level…I’m going to let my little homies ride on ya.”
Leave a Reply