[DWJ] DIR latest
Melissa at Proffitt.com
Mon May 21 14:00:08 EDT 2007
On Sun, 20 May 2007 00:06:32 +0100, Phil Boswell wrote:
>> <on the changes to the Dresden series for TV>
>> >The reaction was pure and simple nerdfury.
>> What I disagree with is the extremely objectionable term "nerdfury" and the
>> implication that fans were wrong to be upset by proposed changes.
>Well, we didn't make the term up: I believe it originated on the Colbert Report
I might just be able to forgive Colbert for that then, because he is a
darling. Still, you're the one who used it here, so you're the one who gets
to take the blame. (I'm wondering if footnotes might not be a good idea
after all. :)
>What really inspired the epithet was the sheer number of people
>suddenly arriving on the forums and posting the same complaints over
>and over, demonstrating complete indifference and contempt for the
>previous discussion, which had lasted several months and was freely
>available for scrutiny, in which the creators of the show explained
>the changes and Jim Butcher himself explained how he was happy with
>the reasoning and content with said changes.
>It was amply demonstrated that the people making the show cared deeply
>about both it AND the original books, but the visitors completely
>ignored this and continued to be rude and insulting.
>You say loyalty goes both ways; well, Jim and the TV guys are being
>loyal to the fans who have been there from the start and have stuck
>through thick and thin. If this annoys people who simply want to drop
>stink-bombs of rudeness into the forums, that is not a problem for me:
>such people deserve to be annoyed.
As I recall, your post was inspired by the discussion on whether or not
massive changes to _The Dark is Rising_ for a movie version would make it
stink to high heaven. Since nobody here was participating in the kind of
irrational rudeness you describe, that anecdote (while interesting in a sort
of train-wreck way) doesn't have much to do with that discussion.
It also becomes clear that what you were referring to was not the changes
those fans objected to, but the manner in which they objected. Also, not
relevant in this forum. Anyone who tries that kind of ham-fisted arrogant
rudeness gets smacked down here. Politely, at first, because we are just
that sweet and loving. I'm sure you've noticed. :)
I appreciate your clarification, which frankly would have been a more
interesting point of discussion at the beginning: how should outraged
readers express their outrage? or, more compelling to me, does it matter if
the author signs off on objectionable changes? Because I can guarantee you
that it does not make me less annoyed with those changes just because Jim
Butcher likes them, except that I am happy he doesn't feel his series has
been eviscerated* and that I hope he makes a pile of money off it.
*I wrote "butchered" first, then deleted it, because no one would ever
believe it wasn't intentional.
More information about the Dwj