This old essay kind of captures my issues with Sedaris' writing style and the idea of being "anti-irony"https://gawker.com/on-smarm-1476594977 …
-
-
Replying to @Nymphomachy @banalexistence
The funny thing is this piece cites David Foster Wallace's cruise essay as a piece of great writing the New Sincerity never could've created but DFW helped *start* that movement with his E Unibus Pluram essay about TV ruining culture
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
I dunno, I don't think the divide he's talking about is nearly as sharp as he claims Every snarky satirist has something they very fervently and earnestly believe in that they'll give you hell for mocking
3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
I'm not terribly surprised, since snark is *also* effectively an attempt to pull authority and demolish criticism by making something sincere ridiculous and position the snarker as a morally superior enlightened being.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @loudpenitent @arthur_affect and
The real gist to sum all this up is we all hate each other and we're just finding reasons to proclaim why we are the supreme authority and our opponents are vapid, cruel and hollow. Snark, smarm, it's all the same manipulative, petty shit.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Eh, I kind of agree with this line: "Like every other mode, snark can sometimes be done badly or to bad purposes. Smarm, on the other hand, is never a force for good."
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Eh. Call me maybe overly attached to sympathy, but imo the writer doth protest too much. I really just think people want the license to be cruel, hateful shits and think themselves insightful and virtuous. Satire, snark, smarm, they're all ultimately from the same well
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I think it seems pretty clear at this point that, overwhelmingly, smarm is a force that buoys the privileged and snark is the chorus of the marginalized Even when the Shapiros of the internet are attempting the latter it oozes with all the trappings of the former
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
...Nah not really The whole "snark" brand was pioneered by South Park and Family Guy, the "smarm" they were aiming at was clearly the left
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Hmm. That's an interesting argument At least in the case of South Park I've never considered its humor "snarky", like TWP reviews of Veronica Mars episodes are snarky to me and South Park is like the essence of smarm, with its entire "caring about things is super lame" thesis
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
This is just kind of reducing "snark vs smarm" to "people who share my values vs people who don't" Which yes is what Scocca was also doing but he was pretending he wasn't doing that
-
-
So you don't think the Obama/Romney examples highlight an important difference? Like I think Clinton's 2016 campaign was powered by smarm, what with Democrats running heavily on outrage about Trump being mean to gold star families and fucking John McCain specifically
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.