Quote:
Originally Posted by gatsbygirl20  John is (or was) wonderful. Too long writing for the IT can cause columnists to yield to the temptation of becoming "characters" or caricatures of themselves. Witness the mad, foam-flecked Myers before he left. Perhaps this may be happening to John. |
It may well be due to personal obsessions on the part of both Waters and Myers.
Myers in particular had conflicts with editors (a column about the Northern Bank robbery was rejected) and he may have a looser leash in the Independent. (His notorious column about Africa was published by them.)
Quote:
|
Waters had little formal schooling, so has an original cast of mind and is prisoner to no fashionable agenda. Yes, his prose is ruminative, artful, perhaps over-written at times, but he is not in the sound-byte business. I find that most of his work has a perfect clarity, but it can rarely be skimmed for meaning. To those who say "I can't figure the hell what he's going on about", well.........difficult to answer that one without risking being impolite.....
|
Plenty of people can write clearly without being in the sound-bite business.
Quote:
His writing is inconsistant. His recent lament on queues was perhaps not his best. But he has written some excellent, original pieces on religion, consumerism. the challenges facing young males in Irish society etc.
His knowledge of music is, despite his Hot Press stint, unsophisticated and one-dimensional. I totally disagree with his views on feminism (or "feminazis" in his unfortunate phrase.)
|
Perhaps you could recommend some of them - I read his column often during the 1990s and found
His views on feminists are one of his hobbyhorses - once he starts talking about a hobbyhorse he's guaranteed to rant.
Quote:
|
His media persona seems to me to be very dignified. On the recent Late Late triumvirate with Harris and Dunphy he rarely got a word in edgeways, with Harris ranting and Dunphy shamefully playing to the gallery. Waters refused these easy options. He has an old-fashioned, almost aristocratic imperturbability and a gentle, patriarchal gravitas. He accepts the slings and arrows with quiet dignity, rarely seeking popularity or currying favour. (Some rare lapses such as the cringe-making "I am crying now, Katy..." )
|
His personality does come across in very different ways in writing and in interviews - in the ones I've seen of him he's often reserved, which can be a welcome relief to other guests at times.
However he has behaved diffently in interviews - his comments about bloggers were in a radio interview if I recall.
Quote:
|
He is exactly the sort of person who will be sneered at and gratuitously attacked nowadays. We are very quick to label those who do not conform to the bluff, plain, laddish image as "freaks". That word was used by rabid right-wingers and uber-Catholics in the Sixties against anyone who wore their hair long, or who did not toe the conservative line, who thought for themselves, who did not conform. As I remember it, insults regarding personal hygiene (as have been used on this thread) were also the norm. Great days
|
The comments about personal hygene were boorish and laddish. (But I repeat myself!)
I'd hope there were more personalities than laddish and John-Waters-like.