"Synecdoche" post brings out the hate-club
Patrick Goldstein's recent post ponders the release stategy behind Charlie Kaufman's (pictured) hard-to-pronounce "Synecdoche, New York." He even linked to our popular "Synecdoche, New York" video -- where we asked Cannes-goers to pronounce the word for us. And then the commenters started.
Anyone using blog comments as social barometers would think the entire world knows the meaning of the word "syncedoche."
"I think I first learned what a synecdoche was in the seventh grade. And I went to public school."
"Any English major worth his salt should now [sic] how to pronounce synechdoche."
"Oh please, it's not that hard to pronounce."
"You've never heard of the term "synecdoche", and you're (supposedly) writers?"It reminds us that the great public forum that are blogs sometimes fall far short. Anyone who runs them knows that manners and intelligence yield to a kind of pseudo high-minded scolding. In blog comments, there's an easy way to be the smartest guy in the room -- by simply calling the writer an idiot.
Peter Bart regularly gets hosed by shallow commenters, the by-product of having a high-profile blog. In his post on whether celebs help or hurt candidates, he quips that since "politics has become more Hollywood than Hollywood" that "the presence of the true stars may remind voters that, in politics as in the arts, reality and unreality are constantly colliding."
That sparked a mouthful from someone named "jimbunny":
"Don't be a dummy Peter. You live in a vacuous and vainglorious little community that is isolated and protected from the rest of the country as well as the world. I enoy [sic] your take on the 'biz' -- let's keep it to that, before you wade in too far over your melon."
Nevermind that Peter did, in fact, "keep it to that." As the editor-in-chief of a entertainment industry paper many would believe that he's perfectly qualified to write on celebs and politics. He would be the first to acknowledge his opinions are open to debate, but Mr. Bunny bypassed that.
Like most angry commenters on blogs worldwide, Bunny couldn't conceptualize an argument. He could only kick sand. It probably gave him the opportunity to email the link to his like-minded friends - "look how I stuck it to that idiot. LOL!"
In another Peter Bart post, at least one commenter seems to find it entertaining:
"I'm not sure which I find more entertaining, Peter Bart's reviews or the rabid fan boy rebuttals that inevitably follow each and every one. This is some Hate-Club Peter's got going on here."Every blog has its own hate-club. I know many bloggers who don't even look at the comments, much less respond to them. Who wants to join a club that would have them as a member?

Michael Jones is the film festival editor at Variety.com.













Wow, everybody. QED.
Posted by: William Boot | 9/19/2008 10:19:40 AM
QED
Posted by: William Boot | 9/19/2008 10:18:56 AM
Those who can, do. Those who can't, hate.
Posted by: equanimous | 8/13/2008 4:01:51 AM
According to Webster's Online:
"Synecdoche" is used about 6 times out of a sample of 100 million words spoken or written in English. (Rank=143,867)
Other word usage out of 100 million (and ranking):
Metonymy: 23 (rank 72,767)
Imbecile (noun): 17 (rank 85,106)
Idiotic: 82 (rank 36,594)
Vainglorious: 82 (rank 36,594)
Callipygous: unranked
Posted by: Ktroop | 8/11/2008 9:19:46 AM
Better to ask, when does a synecdoche become a metonymy?
Posted by: Law Dog | 8/8/2008 10:39:12 PM
Here's an example of "synecdoche" -- this writer is an "asshole."
"Asshole" is a part of a whole, thus synecdoche.
Posted by: synecdoche | 8/8/2008 2:11:18 PM
This is supposed to be a festival blog, asshole. Were you dropped on your head as a child?
Posted by: gregworm | 8/8/2008 2:05:21 PM
There is no debate that your an imbecile, loser. Get a clue.
Posted by: harryturtle | 8/8/2008 2:01:40 PM
This entire post is idiotic.
Posted by: tomrabbit | 8/8/2008 1:56:33 PM