4 ms·

It's a good article, and the main point is an important one. That being said: am I the only one who finds it quizzical that Joel ever became such a notable pun

It's a good article, and the main point is an important one. That being said: am I the only one who finds it quizzical that Joel ever became such a notable pundit in the first place, in light of all of the articles outlining his (past) clueless behavior?

statictype 17y ago
I think he's popular more for his engaging writing style than anything else. I would consider the fact that he made mistakes in the past a non factor at the least, and at best, an indication that he's capable of learning from mistakes.
- michael_dorfman 17y ago
  I enjoy his writing style. But I think people have been putting him on a pedestal for a while, in terms of the advice he dishes out. The fact that he's made mistakes in the past would be a non-factor, if it weren't for the fact that people are following his dicta-- and how do we know that the advice he gives now is not going to be the fodder for next year's "I-was-so-much-dumber-then" article?
  - BerislavLopac 17y ago
    It's very simple, actually. Anyone who blindly follows another man's advice, without checking everything and bringing their own judgement into the formula, very well deserves all that happens to them.
JunkDNA 17y ago
I actually think his "clueless behavior" is one of the reasons his stuff resonates with people. Everyone makes mistakes, some of us make them a lot. Lots of people in Joel's position are tempted to leave out the mistakes they made when telling their story. By detailing all these blunders, Joel connects with the average "Joe Programmer". Instead of making himself out to be a super-human, he comes off as a an informed peer. It makes his stories much more interesting.
- mechanical_fish 17y ago
  From a very good screenwriting website comes this essay, "Impressive Failure": http://www.wordplayer.com/columns/wp08.Impressive.Failure.html http://www.wordplayer.com/columns/wp08.Impressive.Failure.ht... "In plotting an action-adventure type film, how your hero fails is at least as important as how he succeeds. If the plot requires the hero to fail, try to figure out a way for him to fail as impressively as possible. "Consider RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK. Indiana Jones is perhaps the greatest action hero in the history of the movies. And in his debut film, he flat-out fails from beginning to end. "He loses the golden idol. Marian is kidnapped and he's unable to rescue her. He finds the Ark, but it is immediately taken away. His bluff to destroy the Ark is called, and he gets recaptured. He can't even look upon the Ark when it is opened. And the government ends up with his long sought-after and much suffered-for prize. This guy's an action hero? "Yup. Because he fails so damn impressively, from start to finish. Indy fails so well, in fact, the audience is impressed as hell, and hardly aware of the fact that he's failing. The defeats are just setbacks that create more opportunities for heroism. As an added benefit, Indy wins the audience's sympathy -- the poor guy's trying so hard, you can't help but root for him."

statictype 17y ago

I think he's popular more for his engaging writing style than anything else. I would consider the fact that he made mistakes in the past a non factor at the least, and at best, an indication that he's capable of learning from mistakes.

michael_dorfman 17y ago
I enjoy his writing style. But I think people have been putting him on a pedestal for a while, in terms of the advice he dishes out. The fact that he's made mistakes in the past would be a non-factor, if it weren't for the fact that people are following his dicta-- and how do we know that the advice he gives now is not going to be the fodder for next year's "I-was-so-much-dumber-then" article?
- BerislavLopac 17y ago
  It's very simple, actually. Anyone who blindly follows another man's advice, without checking everything and bringing their own judgement into the formula, very well deserves all that happens to them.

JunkDNA 17y ago

I actually think his "clueless behavior" is one of the reasons his stuff resonates with people. Everyone makes mistakes, some of us make them a lot. Lots of people in Joel's position are tempted to leave out the mistakes they made when telling their story. By detailing all these blunders, Joel connects with the average "Joe Programmer". Instead of making himself out to be a super-human, he comes off as a an informed peer. It makes his stories much more interesting.

mechanical_fish 17y ago
From a very good screenwriting website comes this essay, "Impressive Failure": http://www.wordplayer.com/columns/wp08.Impressive.Failure.html http://www.wordplayer.com/columns/wp08.Impressive.Failure.ht... "In plotting an action-adventure type film, how your hero fails is at least as important as how he succeeds. If the plot requires the hero to fail, try to figure out a way for him to fail as impressively as possible. "Consider RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK. Indiana Jones is perhaps the greatest action hero in the history of the movies. And in his debut film, he flat-out fails from beginning to end. "He loses the golden idol. Marian is kidnapped and he's unable to rescue her. He finds the Ark, but it is immediately taken away. His bluff to destroy the Ark is called, and he gets recaptured. He can't even look upon the Ark when it is opened. And the government ends up with his long sought-after and much suffered-for prize. This guy's an action hero? "Yup. Because he fails so damn impressively, from start to finish. Indy fails so well, in fact, the audience is impressed as hell, and hardly aware of the fact that he's failing. The defeats are just setbacks that create more opportunities for heroism. As an added benefit, Indy wins the audience's sympathy -- the poor guy's trying so hard, you can't help but root for him."