What do you think?
Rate this book
Whatever #1
Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded
On September 13, 1998, John Scalzi sat down in front of his computer to write the first entry in his blog "Whatever" -- and changed the history of the Internet as we know it today.
What, you're not swallowing that one? Okay, He started writing the "Whatever" and amused about 15 people that first day. If that many. But he kept at it, for ten years and running. Now 40,000 people drop by on a daily basis to see what he's got to say.
About what? Well, about Politics, writing, family, war, popular culture and cats (especially with bacon on them). Sometimes he's funny. Sometimes he's serious (mostly he's sarcastic). Sometimes people agree with him. Sometimes they send him hate mail, which he grades on originality and sends back. Along the way, Scalzi's become a best-selling, award-winning author, a father, and a geek celebrity. But no matter what, there's always another Whatever to amuse and/or enrage his readers.
Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded collects some of the best and most popular Whatever entries over the history of the blog, from some of the very first entries right up into 2008. It's a decade of Whatever, presented in delightfully random form -- just the way it should be.
What, you're not swallowing that one? Okay, He started writing the "Whatever" and amused about 15 people that first day. If that many. But he kept at it, for ten years and running. Now 40,000 people drop by on a daily basis to see what he's got to say.
About what? Well, about Politics, writing, family, war, popular culture and cats (especially with bacon on them). Sometimes he's funny. Sometimes he's serious (mostly he's sarcastic). Sometimes people agree with him. Sometimes they send him hate mail, which he grades on originality and sends back. Along the way, Scalzi's become a best-selling, award-winning author, a father, and a geek celebrity. But no matter what, there's always another Whatever to amuse and/or enrage his readers.
Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded collects some of the best and most popular Whatever entries over the history of the blog, from some of the very first entries right up into 2008. It's a decade of Whatever, presented in delightfully random form -- just the way it should be.
368 pages, Hardcover
First published September 13, 2008
157 people are currently reading
1394 people want to read
About the author
John Scalzi
185 books28.6k followersJohn Scalzi, having declared his absolute boredom with biographies, disappeared in a puff of glitter and lilac scent.
(If you want to contact John, using the mail function here is a really bad way to do it. Go to his site and use the contact information you find there.)
(If you want to contact John, using the mail function here is a really bad way to do it. Go to his site and use the contact information you find there.)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 145 reviews
September 20, 2025
Back in 1998, sci-fi author John Scalzi started up a blog, long before anyone knew what the hell a blog was. Aptly named Whatever, Scalzi's blog was a forum for him to write about anything, from politics to movies to feminine hygiene products to personal finances to, well, whatever...
Still going strong (check his latest on www.whatever.scalzi.com, which now has, as contributing writer and editor-in-chief, Athena Scalzi, John's daughter), Scalzi's witty little essays have garnered praise and ire from a steadily-growing fanbase, and some of his most memorable entries have been published in "Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded".
Scalzi's writing reminds me a little of early Harlan Ellison (one of my favorite writers of all time), minus some of the bitterness and angst. (Scalzi is, unlike Ellison, NOT a short Jewish kid from Cleveland...)
He definitely doesn't hide his political leanings (left-leaning libertarian...) nor does he pull his punches when he rips new assholes on people he can't stand (fundamentalist Christians, homophobes, the Bush Administration, George Lucas, etc.). The book was a 2009 Hugo Award winner, by the way.
Still going strong (check his latest on www.whatever.scalzi.com, which now has, as contributing writer and editor-in-chief, Athena Scalzi, John's daughter), Scalzi's witty little essays have garnered praise and ire from a steadily-growing fanbase, and some of his most memorable entries have been published in "Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded".
Scalzi's writing reminds me a little of early Harlan Ellison (one of my favorite writers of all time), minus some of the bitterness and angst. (Scalzi is, unlike Ellison, NOT a short Jewish kid from Cleveland...)
He definitely doesn't hide his political leanings (left-leaning libertarian...) nor does he pull his punches when he rips new assholes on people he can't stand (fundamentalist Christians, homophobes, the Bush Administration, George Lucas, etc.). The book was a 2009 Hugo Award winner, by the way.
February 15, 2010
I really like John Scalzi as a blogger—his recent post on the big Amazon Fail had me in stitches—but I don’t think his blog posts work as a book, or at least they don’t as they’re arranged here. The decision to put the posts in a random order means that there’s never any sense of progression to his thoughts; too many posts on the same topics are included; and his frequent, mildly condescending posts on How to Be a Successful Writer and Lead a Successful Life made me feel shitty. Obviously, it’s not Scalzi’s job to make me feel good or even to not make me feel shitty, but “writing” advice like “marry someone more successful than you” is really not helpful to me right now, and not something I want to read in a book of humorous essays. Also, I get that writing is a job and should be treated as such, but man does Scalzi make it sound like such a drag.
I think Scalzi’s scathing sense of humor—which I enjoy—may be better taken in small doses than absorbed all at once like this.
I think Scalzi’s scathing sense of humor—which I enjoy—may be better taken in small doses than absorbed all at once like this.
February 27, 2020
You're probably not going to like the same pieces I do here, just because they cover such a broad range of topics. This does demonstrate nicely why I read Whatever and why I read Scalzi's fiction. I like his voice, his sense of humor, his pragmatism, and his occasional scathing tone. He writes much like the Spouse, I think, whose writing I'm very fond of. Although the much-touted love of Journey is points-off.
My favorite bits: why some Christians should be called Leviticans, why every political party affiliation is annoying, on the joys of marriage, on poverty, on the Creationism museum. The ones written on 9/11 and the Iraqi war don't hold up as well. But still, I have to love a guy who blithely acknowledges that while he has some very small measure of celebrity, it is less than his cat Ghlaghghee enjoys.
A good book to keep around, because there's something to delight and annoy everyone in here.
***
26 February 2020
I am curious to see how well the prediction of gay president holds up.
My favorite bits: why some Christians should be called Leviticans, why every political party affiliation is annoying, on the joys of marriage, on poverty, on the Creationism museum. The ones written on 9/11 and the Iraqi war don't hold up as well. But still, I have to love a guy who blithely acknowledges that while he has some very small measure of celebrity, it is less than his cat Ghlaghghee enjoys.
A good book to keep around, because there's something to delight and annoy everyone in here.
***
26 February 2020
I am curious to see how well the prediction of gay president holds up.
August 24, 2013
I expected a lot from this book. In the spirit of full disclosure, I have never read John Scalzi's blog before this book.
I was warned in the foreword, but the lack a theme to the arrangement of the posts in this book was a little jarring. The posts included in this book seemed to revolve Scalzi's random musings on various subjects such as:
* American Politics: These were mostly thoughts about Clinton, Bush and Gore. Non-Americans like me may find these a bit dull. There were also a few posts about various political factions in the Unites States and how Scalzi feels an equal amount of disdain for them.
* Parenting: This was mostly Scalzi talking about how great it is to be a dad and the parenting style he adopts with his daughter, Athena. After the first essay, I understood that Athena is a very intelligent child with a very cool childhood because her parents are great (and not assholes). Other parents may find this interesting, but parenting theories usually bore me. It is worth a mention that it is obvious that he idolizes his wife as an ideal strong, beautiful woman but he went on about that a bit too much during the course of the book for my taste. Perhaps these posts stretched out over a longer period negate this problem.
* Writing Tips for Writers: Maybe I have read too many books on writing (something I would never consider true otherwise) but most of Scalzi's advice for writers seemed more of the same. Perhaps new writers would find this interesting in a writing book on its own. In a few posts, the "look how successful I am" theme wore thin. Additionally, I am not sure "marry someone who is successful at a stable job" is valid advice for writers, but what do I know.
* Financial Management Tips for Writers: This was another series of posts that seemed fairly obvious to me and I have no idea whether Scalzi's claims about most writers being terrible about money is true or not. While it was great to find out roughly how well Szalzi has been doing financially, how much his mortgage is, etc., I was a bit bored here as well. Again, this would probably have been better in a short book about writing and the business of writing.
Aside from these, there were some interesting bits about women's sanitary products, clones (my favorite), Muppets and other topics of the day. I found these miscellaneous posts more entertaining that the categories listed above. As a result, I tolerated most of this book and only enjoyed a small subset of the content, which is why I would give this book a 3/5. At least it's well written!
I was warned in the foreword, but the lack a theme to the arrangement of the posts in this book was a little jarring. The posts included in this book seemed to revolve Scalzi's random musings on various subjects such as:
* American Politics: These were mostly thoughts about Clinton, Bush and Gore. Non-Americans like me may find these a bit dull. There were also a few posts about various political factions in the Unites States and how Scalzi feels an equal amount of disdain for them.
* Parenting: This was mostly Scalzi talking about how great it is to be a dad and the parenting style he adopts with his daughter, Athena. After the first essay, I understood that Athena is a very intelligent child with a very cool childhood because her parents are great (and not assholes). Other parents may find this interesting, but parenting theories usually bore me. It is worth a mention that it is obvious that he idolizes his wife as an ideal strong, beautiful woman but he went on about that a bit too much during the course of the book for my taste. Perhaps these posts stretched out over a longer period negate this problem.
* Writing Tips for Writers: Maybe I have read too many books on writing (something I would never consider true otherwise) but most of Scalzi's advice for writers seemed more of the same. Perhaps new writers would find this interesting in a writing book on its own. In a few posts, the "look how successful I am" theme wore thin. Additionally, I am not sure "marry someone who is successful at a stable job" is valid advice for writers, but what do I know.
* Financial Management Tips for Writers: This was another series of posts that seemed fairly obvious to me and I have no idea whether Scalzi's claims about most writers being terrible about money is true or not. While it was great to find out roughly how well Szalzi has been doing financially, how much his mortgage is, etc., I was a bit bored here as well. Again, this would probably have been better in a short book about writing and the business of writing.
Aside from these, there were some interesting bits about women's sanitary products, clones (my favorite), Muppets and other topics of the day. I found these miscellaneous posts more entertaining that the categories listed above. As a result, I tolerated most of this book and only enjoyed a small subset of the content, which is why I would give this book a 3/5. At least it's well written!
April 27, 2024
I was introduced to John Scalzi in high school, when my book club read "Lock In," and I've since read a couple of his newer titles: "The Kaiju Preservation Society" and "Starter Villain." I picked up this particular book on a whim, recognizing not the title but the author's name. I was a little disappointed when I realized that it was a non-fiction collection rather than a science-fiction novel, but I quickly got into the groove of this book and enjoyed its contents immensely.
I never knew that John Scalzi had a blog, let alone that he had collected some of his posts into physical books. It was great to learn more about Scalzi as a person and to hear his thoughts outside of his works of fiction. I'm about the same age as his daughter, Athena, so while I was alive for the majority of the time period this book covers (1998-2008), I wasn't really aware of what was happening. For instance, when he called Elmo a "new" muppet, I was shocked. Hasn't Elmo always been around? Was he not one of the original Sesame Street characters? This is all news to me!
It was the portions covering politics that surprised and intrigued me the most. Sure, I know the names of the two Bushes and Bill Clinton, but I wasn't aware of any presidential elections until 2008, when Obama was elected. It was fascinating to learn more about a period of history through which I lived but was rather oblivious to the larger world (due to the fact that I was in kindergarten). I asked my mom for clarification on certain events, and she helped me puzzle out things like the name Dubya. (I initially pronounced it "doo-byuh" and had no clue who it was. Then, I realized that it's a shortening of the W in George W. Bush. I am decades late to this widely acknowledged nickname.)
As a writer, I loved hearing Scalzi talk about his experience with the craft. He approaches writing more like a career than I do, since I treat it as a hobby separate from my current job. Yet I still learned something from his advice and felt inspired to carve out more time in my schedule for my writing projects.
I also enjoyed how outspoken Scalzi is about gay rights. He sounds so passionate and supportive of the community that I found myself wondering if he were part of it himself. Funnily enough, soon after thinking this, I reached the blog post where Scalzi confirms that he is straight but was mistaken for gay as a child. He says that he confuses less people now that he's older and married to a woman, which probably makes my experience an outlier. Of course, I'll gladly accept Scalzi as a straight ally, although I must commend his queer knowledge base. He casually references things like "the love that dare not speak its name," which puts him quite a few steps ahead of most allies that I've met. He drops queer lingo every so often and broaches topics that wouldn't sound out of place in the LGBTQ Centers I've visited. All this to say: At times, John Scalzi sounded so cool that I thought he must be queer. I will accept the fact that he isn't.
I never knew that John Scalzi had a blog, let alone that he had collected some of his posts into physical books. It was great to learn more about Scalzi as a person and to hear his thoughts outside of his works of fiction. I'm about the same age as his daughter, Athena, so while I was alive for the majority of the time period this book covers (1998-2008), I wasn't really aware of what was happening. For instance, when he called Elmo a "new" muppet, I was shocked. Hasn't Elmo always been around? Was he not one of the original Sesame Street characters? This is all news to me!
It was the portions covering politics that surprised and intrigued me the most. Sure, I know the names of the two Bushes and Bill Clinton, but I wasn't aware of any presidential elections until 2008, when Obama was elected. It was fascinating to learn more about a period of history through which I lived but was rather oblivious to the larger world (due to the fact that I was in kindergarten). I asked my mom for clarification on certain events, and she helped me puzzle out things like the name Dubya. (I initially pronounced it "doo-byuh" and had no clue who it was. Then, I realized that it's a shortening of the W in George W. Bush. I am decades late to this widely acknowledged nickname.)
As a writer, I loved hearing Scalzi talk about his experience with the craft. He approaches writing more like a career than I do, since I treat it as a hobby separate from my current job. Yet I still learned something from his advice and felt inspired to carve out more time in my schedule for my writing projects.
I also enjoyed how outspoken Scalzi is about gay rights. He sounds so passionate and supportive of the community that I found myself wondering if he were part of it himself. Funnily enough, soon after thinking this, I reached the blog post where Scalzi confirms that he is straight but was mistaken for gay as a child. He says that he confuses less people now that he's older and married to a woman, which probably makes my experience an outlier. Of course, I'll gladly accept Scalzi as a straight ally, although I must commend his queer knowledge base. He casually references things like "the love that dare not speak its name," which puts him quite a few steps ahead of most allies that I've met. He drops queer lingo every so often and broaches topics that wouldn't sound out of place in the LGBTQ Centers I've visited. All this to say: At times, John Scalzi sounded so cool that I thought he must be queer. I will accept the fact that he isn't.
January 3, 2013
I'm a recent reader of Whatever, Scalzi's blog, and I've enjoyed reading his posts over there, so I picked up this book. I'd hoped there would be some more commentary in line with the title--a point-by-point dissection of hate mail addressed to him--but it's actually a collection of previously published blog entries, most of which I hadn't read before.
My reaction is mixed. I enjoy his writing style and find his prose fairly accessible, if a bit wordy. His tone is sometimes self-congratulatory, which annoyed me. He's a very successful writer, and deserves a bit of ego, but given that I actually agree with his political positions and most of his writing positions, and I found him a bit over-the-top at times, I can't imagine the anger his tone incites in people who disagree with him.
He's witty and has a tendency toward the absurd that I can appreciate because I find it lacking in my own writing, but occasionally it's just too much (a post devoted entirely to the trials and tribulations of cereal box characters? Really?) On the other hand, some of his posts (his post commemorating 9/11, on the death of Christopher Robin, on poverty, on the Surrendered Wife movement) struck me hard. He's capable of an emotional depth and resonance I hope to find in my own writing someday... and I found myself disappointed that the entire book didn't get that kind of intense response from me.
I'll remember this book, and I'll probably reread some of the posts in it, but not the entire thing.
My reaction is mixed. I enjoy his writing style and find his prose fairly accessible, if a bit wordy. His tone is sometimes self-congratulatory, which annoyed me. He's a very successful writer, and deserves a bit of ego, but given that I actually agree with his political positions and most of his writing positions, and I found him a bit over-the-top at times, I can't imagine the anger his tone incites in people who disagree with him.
He's witty and has a tendency toward the absurd that I can appreciate because I find it lacking in my own writing, but occasionally it's just too much (a post devoted entirely to the trials and tribulations of cereal box characters? Really?) On the other hand, some of his posts (his post commemorating 9/11, on the death of Christopher Robin, on poverty, on the Surrendered Wife movement) struck me hard. He's capable of an emotional depth and resonance I hope to find in my own writing someday... and I found myself disappointed that the entire book didn't get that kind of intense response from me.
I'll remember this book, and I'll probably reread some of the posts in it, but not the entire thing.
March 27, 2024
3.5 stars. I became aware of Scalzi not through his fiction, but via MetaFilter, not long after he started his Whatever blog. I've visited his site from time to time, read quite a few of the posts/essays, and have followed him on BlueSky for the last few months. I find him quite delightful, at least as a public persona, and I've always appreciated that he has had Romancelandia's back during the various explosions of drama and wankery. Scalzi is good peoples.
This is the first collection of posts from his blog, and it certainly contains a multitude: John's thoughts on life, fatherhood, writing, social issues, politics, and cheese. I enjoyed most of the entries here, though I fairly quickly started skipping the political essays (oh, what sweet summer children we were 20 years ago, believing that Dubya was the worst president we'd see in this millenium). Politics aside (tho I knocked off a star), I found this collection at turns hilarious, charming, and poignant. Some of his most famous posts are included here (his thoughts on poverty, the business of writing, and what Star Wars is and isn't). My favorites from this collection include:
[+] Lazy People Irritate Me (Feb 7, 2002)
[+] The Lie of Star Wars as Entertainment (Oct 11, 2002)
[+] Best Cheese of the Millennium (Dec 27, 1999) - I laughed so hard I needed my inhaler
[+] Unasked-for Advice to New Writers About Money (Feb 11, 2008) - a MUST READ for anybody who wants to be paid to write
[+] Mowing Life Lessons (Jun 20, 2002)
[+] Being Poor (Sep 3, 2005)
[+] Shaming the Poor (Mar 2, 2008)
[+] Fatherhood and Pie (Apr 22, 2004)
[+] The Dictator of Writing Announces His Decrees, Part 1 (May 17, 2007)
[+] The Speckless Sky (Sep 12, 2001)
[+] The New Sesame Street Characters Suck (Oct 2, 2000)
This is the first collection of posts from his blog, and it certainly contains a multitude: John's thoughts on life, fatherhood, writing, social issues, politics, and cheese. I enjoyed most of the entries here, though I fairly quickly started skipping the political essays (oh, what sweet summer children we were 20 years ago, believing that Dubya was the worst president we'd see in this millenium). Politics aside (tho I knocked off a star), I found this collection at turns hilarious, charming, and poignant. Some of his most famous posts are included here (his thoughts on poverty, the business of writing, and what Star Wars is and isn't). My favorites from this collection include:
[+] Lazy People Irritate Me (Feb 7, 2002)
[+] The Lie of Star Wars as Entertainment (Oct 11, 2002)
[+] Best Cheese of the Millennium (Dec 27, 1999) - I laughed so hard I needed my inhaler
[+] Unasked-for Advice to New Writers About Money (Feb 11, 2008) - a MUST READ for anybody who wants to be paid to write
[+] Mowing Life Lessons (Jun 20, 2002)
[+] Being Poor (Sep 3, 2005)
[+] Shaming the Poor (Mar 2, 2008)
[+] Fatherhood and Pie (Apr 22, 2004)
[+] The Dictator of Writing Announces His Decrees, Part 1 (May 17, 2007)
[+] The Speckless Sky (Sep 12, 2001)
[+] The New Sesame Street Characters Suck (Oct 2, 2000)
December 29, 2020
I've seen Scalzi at a convention, he was the most consistently entertaining panelist at any convention I've been to.
I've read most of Scalzi's books. They are not high art, but they can be quite entertaining.
I've read the occasional blog entry from Scalzi, but maybe a few every couple of years.
This book was interesting but kind of a slog. It was also kind of a time capsule, a memory of what things were like a little while ago. Of things that I found important at the time. As I was already aware, Trump puts George W Bush in perspective. Covid-19 and the Trump Republicans puts a lot of things in perspective.
This book also captures a bunch on writing and being poor and parenting. Generally items worth noting, but nothing I'll be generally quoting.
Still I'm glad I read this, but I won't re-read it.
I've read most of Scalzi's books. They are not high art, but they can be quite entertaining.
I've read the occasional blog entry from Scalzi, but maybe a few every couple of years.
This book was interesting but kind of a slog. It was also kind of a time capsule, a memory of what things were like a little while ago. Of things that I found important at the time. As I was already aware, Trump puts George W Bush in perspective. Covid-19 and the Trump Republicans puts a lot of things in perspective.
This book also captures a bunch on writing and being poor and parenting. Generally items worth noting, but nothing I'll be generally quoting.
Still I'm glad I read this, but I won't re-read it.
September 10, 2016
A collection of blogerity (shut up, I can make up words in my own reviews) well worth reading.
"Best Cheese of the Millenium" (12/27/99) is my absolute favorite piece in this book. It made me laugh so hard I woke my daughter who was sleeping upstairs! Of course several other essays were funny, too. But don't think this is an entirely humorous book.
Some bits were deeply touching. Personal stories and even reflections on certain news items stirred empathy and were illuminating.
Some were, well, political ranting. (Not that I disagree with many of Mr. Scalzi's political viewpoints - I just can't be arsed to consider the political sphere for too long or my head explodes like some sort of overstuffed hot pocket that's been microwaved about five minutes past the recommended heating time.)
All were well-written and full of scintillating bon mots. Even worse: I learned things. I'm terribly afraid I must now spend several days reading through the archives of http://whatever.scalzi.com/
Don't wait up.
"Best Cheese of the Millenium" (12/27/99) is my absolute favorite piece in this book. It made me laugh so hard I woke my daughter who was sleeping upstairs! Of course several other essays were funny, too. But don't think this is an entirely humorous book.
Some bits were deeply touching. Personal stories and even reflections on certain news items stirred empathy and were illuminating.
Some were, well, political ranting. (Not that I disagree with many of Mr. Scalzi's political viewpoints - I just can't be arsed to consider the political sphere for too long or my head explodes like some sort of overstuffed hot pocket that's been microwaved about five minutes past the recommended heating time.)
All were well-written and full of scintillating bon mots. Even worse: I learned things. I'm terribly afraid I must now spend several days reading through the archives of http://whatever.scalzi.com/
Don't wait up.
June 15, 2011
I had a little trouble with the format of this book at first, but then I grew to really appreciate it. Most of the essays/blogs are like 3 pages long, and, during this really busy period of my life, it was great to pick up the book I'm reading after 2 days and not feel completely out of the loop.
I found a lot of wisdom in this book. He gave credence to a lot of things that I think about that just sound too crabby to most people. I now have a line that I will use on the Haters: "My Jesus forgives your Hater Jesus!" Also: "I'm too busy to worry about aging and death!" and "If you are able bodied and have been educated, you are barred from whining about anything!" Ha!
Really enjoyed this book! An author with a lot of good things to say.
I found a lot of wisdom in this book. He gave credence to a lot of things that I think about that just sound too crabby to most people. I now have a line that I will use on the Haters: "My Jesus forgives your Hater Jesus!" Also: "I'm too busy to worry about aging and death!" and "If you are able bodied and have been educated, you are barred from whining about anything!" Ha!
Really enjoyed this book! An author with a lot of good things to say.
January 3, 2023
An entertaining, thoughtful, amusing and altogether random sampling of blog entries from John Scalzi's Whatever. While a lot of the blog posts(especially the Dubya entries) now lack the punch they had when they were relevant, many of the others are on topics timeless enough (author advice, notes on fatherhood, why "The Final Countdown" was the worst hair-metal song ever) that they're still worth the read. Of course, since the book isn't arranged topically, you never know what you're going to get. It would make as much sense to open it up at a random page each time you sit down with it as it would to read it cover-to-cover.
January 17, 2025
I wanted to give this book 3 1/2 stars. It is often funny, sometimes weird, politically incorrect and in many ways it exemplifies the reason why I think not all Democrats brain dead. They really do have working minds.... amazing to see it at work here.
Of course, I did disagree when the author talked about politics, but he made intelligent arguments, ones I could understand and sympathize with. I just couldn't agree with them.
An example is the essay the author wrote regarding Al Gore lustily kissing his wife, Tipper, on stage at the Democrat convention. I agreed with the author on most of his points. It was good to see a man still loved his wife and was willing to show it in public. However, as the author waxed poetic about marriage, I couldn't help thinking... "Yeah, but he was cheating on her. That's why they got divorced." I don't know if Al had been cheating on Tipper at that time, but later, a massage therapist accused him of improper behavior. (I'm being euphemistic here.)
So... a few of the articles are dated, mostly the political ones. They were still worth reading.
I might read these essays again.
Of course, I did disagree when the author talked about politics, but he made intelligent arguments, ones I could understand and sympathize with. I just couldn't agree with them.
An example is the essay the author wrote regarding Al Gore lustily kissing his wife, Tipper, on stage at the Democrat convention. I agreed with the author on most of his points. It was good to see a man still loved his wife and was willing to show it in public. However, as the author waxed poetic about marriage, I couldn't help thinking... "Yeah, but he was cheating on her. That's why they got divorced." I don't know if Al had been cheating on Tipper at that time, but later, a massage therapist accused him of improper behavior. (I'm being euphemistic here.)
So... a few of the articles are dated, mostly the political ones. They were still worth reading.
I might read these essays again.
December 28, 2021
A collection of blog posts from John Scalzi which is open, conversational and both entertaining and thought provoking. His writing is designed to provoke discussion and encourage people to adapt their mindset.
September 5, 2024
I read about a third of this. Didn't catch my interest like his sci foliage novels. I picked this up because I really enjoy his books. I think I'll stick to his fiction.
February 18, 2024
Scalzi is an entertaining writer, and I enjoyed some of the entries, but after awhile the lack of any kind of structure and the blithe skipping around in time and topic started emphasizing a weird same-ness between the entries.
I got about halfway through the book and then stopped because I was starting to dislike the person that was coming across in the entries and I otherwise generally like Scalzi's books and his in-person interviews. But due to the binge format of this book, combined with a lack of any other narrative focus, 85% the entries felt like they were always tearing others down, taking cheap shots for a pithy turn of phrase, and generally extremely jaded and cranky. I suspect this would be much better read in its original format of a blog, pieced out over a decade, not read all at once in an hour.
I got about halfway through the book and then stopped because I was starting to dislike the person that was coming across in the entries and I otherwise generally like Scalzi's books and his in-person interviews. But due to the binge format of this book, combined with a lack of any other narrative focus, 85% the entries felt like they were always tearing others down, taking cheap shots for a pithy turn of phrase, and generally extremely jaded and cranky. I suspect this would be much better read in its original format of a blog, pieced out over a decade, not read all at once in an hour.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 21, 2013
I got a little annoyed at the idea of buying an anthology of a hundred or so blog posts, but it says that's what this is right on the back cover, so that goof's on me, even if nobody bothered to fix an embarrassing number of typos in the conversion to print. Scalzi is a strong writer and his feel for metaphor is usually solid. My criticisms of this book fall along two main lines:
1) I'd have liked to have seen greater diversity in the posts that were included - seems like many of the posts here fall into the following four categories:
-Gee, Conservative Christians Are Intolerant Hypocrites
-I Have Some Advice For You About Your Writing Career!
-Ludicrous Scenarios I Imagine For Fictional Characters We All Know and Love
-Something Childishly Simpleminded About World Politics
2) ^^^ This last is the one that I think is a real weakness. Yes, partly it's just that I disagree with Scalzi's politics in some cases, but his political reasoning is naive enough to make one cringe. His case for the Iraq War poses as something fully baked, but pretty much amounts to the crap mainstream argument of "Saddam was a bad guy and hey, we're spending all this money on a big military anyway, so why shouldn't we?" Very weird that a guy with a University of Chicago philosophy degree seems to have devoted no energy to serious engagement with the moral issues surrounding preventive war.
1) I'd have liked to have seen greater diversity in the posts that were included - seems like many of the posts here fall into the following four categories:
-Gee, Conservative Christians Are Intolerant Hypocrites
-I Have Some Advice For You About Your Writing Career!
-Ludicrous Scenarios I Imagine For Fictional Characters We All Know and Love
-Something Childishly Simpleminded About World Politics
2) ^^^ This last is the one that I think is a real weakness. Yes, partly it's just that I disagree with Scalzi's politics in some cases, but his political reasoning is naive enough to make one cringe. His case for the Iraq War poses as something fully baked, but pretty much amounts to the crap mainstream argument of "Saddam was a bad guy and hey, we're spending all this money on a big military anyway, so why shouldn't we?" Very weird that a guy with a University of Chicago philosophy degree seems to have devoted no energy to serious engagement with the moral issues surrounding preventive war.
May 10, 2015
This is a solid 3.5 stars. I liked it but didn't love it. Mostly because this is a collection of his blog posts (not essays but I didn't have a blog shelf). The problem I have with collections is that there's no narrative thread as with a novel or even a biography. It's random thoughts strung together. Now these were grouped somewhat by similar subject matter but my issue was it just got tedious. You cannot binge threads. There's a level of redundancy that just makes you want to scream "ok! Got it!" I have no patience for it. It's fine reading one a day on my Facebook feed but that makes this an incredibly long book to read.
But I like Scalzi's way of thinking. I don't always agree with him but he posits it humorously enough that it's palatable. My issue actually was when I did agree with him. It felt like he was preaching to the choir and I wanted to read more about dinosaurs in space (Spoiler: there are no dinosaurs in space in this book).
But what bumped it up for me from 3 stars is what he wrote about poverty. We need more articles like that. We need every day to be reminded that there should be NO shame in poverty.
But then I had to take half a star away because he picked pie over cake when clearly that is the wrong answer unless you pick Boston Creme Pie which is the best of both worlds mostly because you get cake instead of pie.
I'll stick to his novels but it was an interesting time capsule for my generation.
But I like Scalzi's way of thinking. I don't always agree with him but he posits it humorously enough that it's palatable. My issue actually was when I did agree with him. It felt like he was preaching to the choir and I wanted to read more about dinosaurs in space (Spoiler: there are no dinosaurs in space in this book).
But what bumped it up for me from 3 stars is what he wrote about poverty. We need more articles like that. We need every day to be reminded that there should be NO shame in poverty.
But then I had to take half a star away because he picked pie over cake when clearly that is the wrong answer unless you pick Boston Creme Pie which is the best of both worlds mostly because you get cake instead of pie.
I'll stick to his novels but it was an interesting time capsule for my generation.
January 3, 2024
I picked this up as part of a John Scalzi Humble Bundle of e-books. Most of them, I'd already read (but it never hurts to own some DRM-free e-books, free of Amazon's shackles), but this one - a collection of articles from John's "Whatever" blog - was new to me. I haven't really been a regular reader of Whatever, and these articles are from 1998-2008... and I don't really think they needed to be collected, nor even available in 2023. I suppose when this collection was first released they may have had some relevance, but a lot in here now feels SUPER dated. Especially the political articles on, for example, Clinton's impeachment, or Bush's incompetence and the Iraq war (especially in a post-Trump era, who, in my opinion - and likely John's - is a MUCH worse president than Bush ever was).
Some of the other articles about writing or parenting are still good and stand the test of time, but they are few and far between. The articles are presented in no sort of order - not by date, nor topic - and the ebook formatting is abysmal. Had this not been part of a bundle, I doubt I would have ever read it, nor would I have ever needed to. I'll stick to Scalzi's fiction, which usually at least has a sense of humour.
Some of the other articles about writing or parenting are still good and stand the test of time, but they are few and far between. The articles are presented in no sort of order - not by date, nor topic - and the ebook formatting is abysmal. Had this not been part of a bundle, I doubt I would have ever read it, nor would I have ever needed to. I'll stick to Scalzi's fiction, which usually at least has a sense of humour.
Read
March 2, 2011"http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1224752.html[return][return]This is a compilation of Scalzi's writing from his blog, essentially a set of rants and thought pieces on various subjects. I only became aware of his blog when I featured on it myself, but his writing is entertaining (more than his fiction, for my taste). Some of his pieces are very memorable - my favourites were his funny pieces on Scooby Doo and cheese (sadly neither is archived online), and his more thoughtful pieces on poverty and Richard Dawkins. (Links provided so that you can decide if you want to read any more, given that I thought these were the best.)"
February 14, 2011
I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Unlike Sleeping Naked is Green (one of the other books I've read this year that started as a blog), this is more of a traditional collection of blog posts, printed verbatim. But John Scalzi is an engaging writer with a biting sense of humor.
The only thing I would have liked was more of a sense of cohesion. There was no organization, with the posts neither organized by original date or by subject matter. It comes across as completely random. On the other hand, that may be why I kept reading long after I told myself it was time to put the book down to do chores, since you never know what the next post would be about. It could be about politics, advice for writers, or a post on why Freddy, from the Scooby Doo cartoon, is a cult leader.
And the intro from Will "the most hated character on Star Trek The Next Generation" Wheaton is also pretty amusing on its own.
The only thing I would have liked was more of a sense of cohesion. There was no organization, with the posts neither organized by original date or by subject matter. It comes across as completely random. On the other hand, that may be why I kept reading long after I told myself it was time to put the book down to do chores, since you never know what the next post would be about. It could be about politics, advice for writers, or a post on why Freddy, from the Scooby Doo cartoon, is a cult leader.
And the intro from Will "the most hated character on Star Trek The Next Generation" Wheaton is also pretty amusing on its own.
June 29, 2017
I thoroughly enjoyed this book. It is a compilation, in random order, of blog posts over about 10 years from Scalzi's blog Whatever. Some of the blog posts are more engaging than others, but Scalzi is so adept at expressing himself in just the right way that all of them were at least interesting. I have read most of his books but had not read Whatever until I picked up this book. It's one of those books I read from occasionally, which is why it took so long to read it. I'm always reading 3 books at once. I especially got a kick out of his posts on the Bush/Kerry election since I read them during the latest election fiasco, Clinton/Trump. Scalzi loves to rant, and I often agree with his point of view, but it is his writing style and clarity of thought that really speak to me.
May 24, 2010
A great compilation of Scalzi's blog posts, many of which are still well worth a reread even for regular visitors to his site. I enjoyed the scatter-shot organization and mental massage of jumping from topic to topic and not in chronological order; at first, I wanted topics lumped together so as to follow threads of discussion and argument. The book works much better as is, almost like a cocktail party discussion that flows from one topic to the next and back again.
Whether your a writer, a reader, a politics junkie, or just someone who appreciates a well-done essay (short or long), this book should definitely be on your to-read pile.
Whether your a writer, a reader, a politics junkie, or just someone who appreciates a well-done essay (short or long), this book should definitely be on your to-read pile.
Read
December 17, 2013Ok, I get it, you are a clever blogger (in fact, one of the original bloogers when blogging was just starting out), who is not afraid to speak (type) your mind. Amusing and interesting at first, but gets to be a bit of a drag. Even though I agree with you on many things, it gets boring. About halfway through I began to scan the blog entries to see if I wanted to bother. good stuff, but a bit of the same thing after a while. Loved the title though (that's why I picked it up in the first place!)
September 20, 2011
Scalzi's fiction is fantastic but this collection of non-fiction posts from his blog are seldom entertaining not to mention riddled with typos.
September 6, 2012
One of the funniest books I have read in a long time. Acerbic is about the best way to describe it.
October 30, 2019
3.5 stars
October 9, 2017
This book is hilarious, sarcastic, thoughtful, and just plain wonderful. I am now reading his blog daily.
http://nicolewbrown.blogspot.com/2016...
Put these five in a room, and you don’t have the Scooby Gang, you have the Breakfast Club, minus the happy ending where they all sign a joint declaration to the music of Simple Minds. So the idea of this group being a naturally occurring grouping of teenagers is out, way out—and enforced contact would result in somebody being bitten, not necessarily by Scooby. Fortunately, there’s a much more rational explanation for this odd little grouping, led by Fred. It is: Fred is not the leader of a gang of friends, he’s the leader of a cult.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p84)
Occasionally I am asked if I believe in Jesus. My standard answer to this is “as much as I believe in evolution,” which serves the dual purpose of both answering in the affirmative and usually annoying the person who asks the question.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p85)
We’re all a country song waiting to happen.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p109-10)
I could never be a vegetarian. First of all, my heart just wouldn’t be in it. I’m okay with the fact that what I’m cramming into my mouth was once a living thing, because with the exception of chewing gum (which is some sort of plastic, untouched by nature), everything you eat was once living. It’s the way the whole digestive thing is set up. You can’t live on chewing gum and multivitamins. I tried it my senior year of college, when I [sic] running low on rent money. It just doesn’t work.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p 115)
The only other meat product in the fridge was a package of turkey ham that had been sitting in the meat bin for longer than I could remember. Which of course is a very bad sign. It was lying in wait to ambush me. It was the turkey’s revenge—first it was killed, and then it was make to perform a carnivorous transvestite act, masquerading as the meat of a pig. Its only method of revenge was to lie in the meat bin past its due date and trick me into eating it then. Well, not this time, Tom. I passed it up (but I didn’t remove it from the fridge and throw it in the trash, its threat then forever neutralized. No, I don’t know why not. I suspect the decision will come back to haunt me.)
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p116)
Star Wars is not entertainment. Star Wars is George Lucas masturbating to a picture of Joseph Campbell and conning billions of people into watching the money shot. There is nothing in the least bit “popular” about the Star Wars films. This is true of all of them, but especially of Episodes I, II, and III. They are the selfish, ungenerous, onanistic output of a man who has no desire to include others in the internal grammar of his fictional world. They are the ultimate in auteur theory, but this creator has contempt for the people who view his work—or if not contempt, at the very least a near-autistic lack of concern as to whether anyone else “gets” his vision. The word “entertainer” has an assumption that the creator/actor is reaching out to his [sic] or audience to engage them. George Lucas doesn’t bother with this. He won’t keep you out of his universe; he just doesn’t care that you’re in it. To call the Star Wars films “entertainment” is to fundamentally misapprehend the meaning of the word.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p120)
Thousands of years from now, after the inevitable apocalypse of some sort wipes out our civilization, future archaeologists will scour the land to make some sense of our times, and I think the process will go something like this.
Archeologist1: Look, it’s another temple of the ancestors’ dominant faith. Note the golden arches.
Archeologist2: And look what I’ve found in the storage crypt! (pulls out a box of cheese slices)
Archeologist1: Ah, the communion squares. For their ritual obescience to Ro-Nald, the demon destroyer of worlds. You can see his terrible visage bedecking the illuminated windows from behind the tithing altar.
Archeologist2: (sniffing the cheese) These smell terrible. It must have been some sort of penance to injest these.
Archeologist1: (glancing over) You know, those samples have maintained their unholy orange taint. They may still be potent.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p134)
But seriously, the ability to just come out and put on a placard that the Jurassic era is temporarily contiguous with the Fifth Dynasty of the Old Kingdom of Egypt—well, there’s a word for that, and that word is chutzpah. Because, look, that’s something you really have to sell if you want anyone to buy it. It’s one thing to say to people that God directly created the dinosaurs and that they lived in the Garden of Eden. It’s another thing to suggest they lived long enough to harass the Minoans, and do it all with a straight face.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p139)
If we can’t tell the gays from the straights, then the bisexuals are really up the creek, aren’t they? Simultaneously, wearing a too-tight ribbed tank top and relaxed fit Wranglers won’t mean anything anymore. These sort of articles make me want to smack the [New York] Times upside the head and yell at it to try its hand at actual news again, you know, for a refreshing change. I hear there’s a war on. Secondly: This is a bad thing? We live in an era in which an active quorum of religious bigots would quarantine gays into concentration camps if they could (“It’s just like Guantanamo-only fabulous!”), and the Times is snarkily concerned that we can’t simply visually identify the gay guys anymore? Hell. I’ll happily wear a leather armband if it’ll flummox a hateful Bible-wielder. And I’ll let a gay man borrow my Wal-Mart purchased t-shirt, just to really throw them off. He can’t be gay---that shirt is 40% polyester! Yes, the gay can blend. Just like polycotton.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p143)
Professing to have a long-standing crush on an unapproachable girl, is, of course very teen gay. So is being verbally clever, slight of build, an active participant in singing and theater groups and enjoying Depeche Mode on a regular basis. And I took dance. Modern and Jazz. Oh, yeah. Add it all up and I was queer to the friggin’ core. The only thing that really pegged me as possibly being in the heterosexual camp was that I was a freakin’ slob and that in addition to enjoying Depeche Mode I was also a big fan of Journey. But as anyone can tell you, gay teens compensate for their queerness by doing things like, you know, picking a random corporate rock band to obsess over, hopefully one with a moderately cute lead singer. In my era it would be Journey. 10 years later: Creed (Today: Well, hell. All those new rock bands seem pretty sexually all over the map, don’t they? Have you got a gander at, say, Franz Ferdinand?).
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p144)
Here in the US, gay is the new British, which is to say that if people think you’re gay, they also think you are smarter, wittier, and more fun to be around than the average guy. Sure, you sodomize other men on occasion, but that’s your business, and we Americans always suspected British men had sodomy as a required subject at Eton.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p145)
Jesus was divine, but also human. He was a baby, he had to eat. Mary was the Mother of God but also a mother; she gave birth, her body pumped out milk so she could feed her baby. Mary suckled Baby Jesus. Deal with it. The response. We know she did it, we just don’t want to see it or think about it. And or course, the answer here is: Why on Earth not? Well, for one thing, it’s a breast—and we all know that looking at boobs arouses thoughts of sex. Sex leads to sin, sin leads to fear, fear leads to hate, hate leads to suffering. So we just can’t have the Virgin Mary going topless. The kids will riot. As you can imagine, this line of reasoning makes me giggle. For one thing, there’s undoubtedly a special seating area in Hell for people who have lustful thoughts about the Virgin Mary (excluding Joseph.)…For another thing, breasts being used for breastfeeding are unsexy in almost exactly the same way a vagina being used for birth is unsexy—indeed, it’s a vivid reminder that God, in His wisdom, evolved dual uses for just about every fun-providing part of the human anatomy, and that second use is definitely not about having a good time.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p166-7)
One of the things that really chaps my ass about the people who oppose gay marriage is that so many of them seem to believe that allowing guys to marry guys or gals to marry gals will tumble the entire nation into a festering cesspool of carnal inequity, in which everyone suddenly turns into lustful raveners who engage in group marriages with dogs and close relatives, like recursively genetic unfortunates or characters from a late-era Robert Heinlein novel.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p169)
I would suspect that on a day-to-day basis and in his personal encounters the man is normal enough, which makes him, like most people, a generally nice person to be around. I’m also sure that, like most people, he has his moments of irritability, neuroses, and supreme dickheadedness, which unfortunately for him are played out on the world stage and make for good news, while the rest of us get to have our moments of incivil stupidly in relative obscurity. One correspondent, in listing Dubya’s not-nice crimes against humanity, noted to me that the man is reportedly given to irrational bouts of rage. Well, maybe he is. On the other hand, yesterday I beat a malfunctioning phone to death with a hammer. So maybe I’m not the best person to judge someone for their irrational bouts of rage. And anyway, hammering my phone to death does not make me any less nice. Yes, yes, where I hammer a phone in a fit of pique, Dubya’s can bomb a country. But I’m reasonably sure they’d bring in Colin Powell to hose him down first…Dubya-haters want him to be evil because they perceive his policies to be evil…The problem with that formulation is that it’s totally wrong; nice people do these sorts of things all the time.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008, 173-4)
You have to be a really interesting sort of ignorant not to know that the Marines kill people from time to time. Your first hint: The big rifle so many of those Marines carry around. Your second hint: All those movies, books and television shows, widely available to the general public, in which Marines are shown, you know, killing people. Your third hint: The fact that the Marines are widely acknowledged to be a branch of the military of the United States, and militaries are likewise widely known, by most people who are smart enough to stand upright, on two legs, to kill other people on occasion (typically members of other nations’ militaries, though sometimes they’re not so picky, depending on country and context).
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008, p177)
Democrats: The attention span of poultry; easily distracted from large, useful goals by pointless minutiae. Not only can’t see the forest for the trees, can’t see the trees for the pine needles. Deserve every bad thing that happens to them because they just can’t get their act together.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p182)
Conservatives: Less interested in explaining their point of view than nuking you and everything you stand for into blackened cinders before your evil world-view catches on like a virus. Conservatives have no volume control on hate and yet were shocked as Hell when Rush Limbaugh went deaf.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p182-3)
Libertarians: Never got over the fact they weren’t the illegitimate children of Robert Heinlein and Ayn Rand; currently punishing the rest of us for it. Unusually smug for a political philosophy that’s never gotten anyone elected for anything above the local water board.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p183)
When you’re a student, grad student or associate professor, you vent in your blog; when you get tenure, you get to vent in a book.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p225)
If fear is hard working and has a goal, angst is like fear’s directionless cousin, the one that has a trust fund and no freakin’ clue what he wants to do. Angst by definition has no definite object; it is formless and ubiquitous, and it just sits on your head and freaks you out.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p231)
Heidegger’s writings are so famously impenetrable they could be used by SWAT teams in place of Kevlar; to the uninitiated, he sounds a little like the self-help counselor from the third circle of Hell (“Love your Dread! Embrace the Nothingness!”). Left unsaid is what happens after one has if fact embraced the nothingness; one has the unsettling feeling that it’s difficult to get cable TV. Also, there’s the question of what happens when on has reached a state of authentic being, only to discover one is authentically an ass.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p232)
Munch knew all about dread; first off, he was Norwegian. Second, he was a sickly boy whose family had an unfortunate tendency of dying on him: His mother when he was five, his sister when he was 14, then his father and brother while he was still young. His other sister? Mentally ill. Munch would write, quite accurately, “Illness, insanity and death were the black angels that kept watch over my cradle and accompanied me all my life.”
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p232)
“The Scream” is just one element in Munch’s epic “Frieze of Life”, a collection of 20-odd canvases jam-packed with angst: One of the four major themes of the work, in fact, is “Anxiety”. But even the more supposedly cheerful theme of “Love”, features paintings swaddled in depression and dread: check out “Ashes” or “Separation”, and angst leaps up and hits you like a jagged rock Don’t even view the “Death” pictures if you’ve skipped your Xanax for the day.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p233)
Given the choice between Heinlein and Rand, which would I want as a parent? Let’s posit that one couldn’t have both—beyond such a union causing the cracking of at least four of the seven seals, there’s a pretty good chance that after about 15 minutes in each other’s presence, either or both of them would have been thumbing their holsters. There can only be one Alpha Male in the room. In a shootout, incidentally, it’d be even money: Heinlein would probably be faster off the draw, but Rand would probably need a stake through the heart to go down. (Before you start: I know about Rand and her thoughts on force. But let’s just see her try to reason with Angry Bob.)
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p247)
When it comes to elections, you don’t let the GOP get close. Letting them get close just means you can’t see where they’re planning to jam in the knife.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p278)
I’m going to talk as a man here for a minute, pleading to any woman out there who might possibly be considering expending a brain cell or two on this whole “Rules” of “Surrendered Wife” angle of things. I will begin by saying that I can’t possibly imagine what the Hell is wrong with you that you’d ever possibly be considering something like this seriously anyway…Whatever the reason, stop. Just stop. The last thing you want to do is put yourself in a position where a man has total control over you. Why? Well, beyond the fact that it’s an irredeemably stupid thing to let anybody have total control of your life besides you, there’s the more particular matter of the fact that men, invariably, are dumb-asses. Big fat stinky dumb asses, with dumb ass ideas about every dumb ass thing. Why we’re allowed out of the house without leashes is beyond me.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p 322)
The Lord is my receiver; I shall not fumble. He maketh me perform the handoff, and occasionally leadeth me to the Hail Mary pass. He restoreth the point spread; He leadeth me down the field toward victory in His name. Yea, though I thread through the Valley of the Blitzing 35-Pound Defensive Line, I will fear no sacking; for Thou art with me; Thy offensive line of burly disciples they comfort me.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p339)
Think about the classic Sesame Street Muppets and you’ll know what I mean. Each of them had his or her own endearingly neurotic quirk. Cookie Monster: Addictive personality and moderate mental retardation. Big Bird: Esteem issues. Bert and Ernie: Co-dependence. Oscar the Grouch: Misanthropy. The Count: Deviant lifestyle. Snuffaluphaus: Hell, he didn’t actually exist. Kermit, well, Kermit was the worst, with his veneer of calm control occasionally exploding into random fits of amphibian rage (now you know why it’s not easy being green). And as for Grover: Good lord. He’s a psychiatrist’s yacht all on his own. Elmo doesn’t have any of this. He’s merely obnoxious and red and has ping-pong eyes. But get this: He’s the most appealing of the new Muppets. The Zoe Muppet, for example, has a personality of the sort that makes you wish that she were real, so you could stuff her in a sack and drown her in a river and be done with her….The first set of Muppets were created in the late 60s, when being freakish and weird held a romantic sort of charm, and there was the idea that maybe we should accept people eve with vaguely neurotic quirks. Today, of course, children’s quirks are merely something to be medicated out of them…The new Muppets don’t have quirks, and without the quirks, they simply grate. This is bad news for our kids, since Muppets more or less reflect their target audience. The solution is clear: Write to the Children’s Television Workshop and demand they make their Muppets more freakish. Do it for the kids. They deserve neurotic Muppets! Years from now, they’ll thank you for it.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p348)
Some people believe bad chocolate is like bad sex: Even when it’s bad, it’s still good. This formulation is nonsense at its root. Bad sex is definitely not still good. It’s actually tremendously depressing, sort of like getting all worked up [sic] go to Disneyland just to find that the only ride open in the whole park is the monorail to and from the parking lot—and that the monorail seats small kind of funky. Secondly, bad chocolate is worse than bad sex. We accept that sex may occasionally be bad…but chocolate is supposed to be above that. Chocolate is supposed to be an absolute good. Occasional bad sex is regrettable, but bad chocolate is a betrayal.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p63)
http://nicolewbrown.blogspot.com/2016...
Put these five in a room, and you don’t have the Scooby Gang, you have the Breakfast Club, minus the happy ending where they all sign a joint declaration to the music of Simple Minds. So the idea of this group being a naturally occurring grouping of teenagers is out, way out—and enforced contact would result in somebody being bitten, not necessarily by Scooby. Fortunately, there’s a much more rational explanation for this odd little grouping, led by Fred. It is: Fred is not the leader of a gang of friends, he’s the leader of a cult.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p84)
Occasionally I am asked if I believe in Jesus. My standard answer to this is “as much as I believe in evolution,” which serves the dual purpose of both answering in the affirmative and usually annoying the person who asks the question.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p85)
We’re all a country song waiting to happen.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p109-10)
I could never be a vegetarian. First of all, my heart just wouldn’t be in it. I’m okay with the fact that what I’m cramming into my mouth was once a living thing, because with the exception of chewing gum (which is some sort of plastic, untouched by nature), everything you eat was once living. It’s the way the whole digestive thing is set up. You can’t live on chewing gum and multivitamins. I tried it my senior year of college, when I [sic] running low on rent money. It just doesn’t work.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p 115)
The only other meat product in the fridge was a package of turkey ham that had been sitting in the meat bin for longer than I could remember. Which of course is a very bad sign. It was lying in wait to ambush me. It was the turkey’s revenge—first it was killed, and then it was make to perform a carnivorous transvestite act, masquerading as the meat of a pig. Its only method of revenge was to lie in the meat bin past its due date and trick me into eating it then. Well, not this time, Tom. I passed it up (but I didn’t remove it from the fridge and throw it in the trash, its threat then forever neutralized. No, I don’t know why not. I suspect the decision will come back to haunt me.)
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p116)
Star Wars is not entertainment. Star Wars is George Lucas masturbating to a picture of Joseph Campbell and conning billions of people into watching the money shot. There is nothing in the least bit “popular” about the Star Wars films. This is true of all of them, but especially of Episodes I, II, and III. They are the selfish, ungenerous, onanistic output of a man who has no desire to include others in the internal grammar of his fictional world. They are the ultimate in auteur theory, but this creator has contempt for the people who view his work—or if not contempt, at the very least a near-autistic lack of concern as to whether anyone else “gets” his vision. The word “entertainer” has an assumption that the creator/actor is reaching out to his [sic] or audience to engage them. George Lucas doesn’t bother with this. He won’t keep you out of his universe; he just doesn’t care that you’re in it. To call the Star Wars films “entertainment” is to fundamentally misapprehend the meaning of the word.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p120)
Thousands of years from now, after the inevitable apocalypse of some sort wipes out our civilization, future archaeologists will scour the land to make some sense of our times, and I think the process will go something like this.
Archeologist1: Look, it’s another temple of the ancestors’ dominant faith. Note the golden arches.
Archeologist2: And look what I’ve found in the storage crypt! (pulls out a box of cheese slices)
Archeologist1: Ah, the communion squares. For their ritual obescience to Ro-Nald, the demon destroyer of worlds. You can see his terrible visage bedecking the illuminated windows from behind the tithing altar.
Archeologist2: (sniffing the cheese) These smell terrible. It must have been some sort of penance to injest these.
Archeologist1: (glancing over) You know, those samples have maintained their unholy orange taint. They may still be potent.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p134)
But seriously, the ability to just come out and put on a placard that the Jurassic era is temporarily contiguous with the Fifth Dynasty of the Old Kingdom of Egypt—well, there’s a word for that, and that word is chutzpah. Because, look, that’s something you really have to sell if you want anyone to buy it. It’s one thing to say to people that God directly created the dinosaurs and that they lived in the Garden of Eden. It’s another thing to suggest they lived long enough to harass the Minoans, and do it all with a straight face.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p139)
If we can’t tell the gays from the straights, then the bisexuals are really up the creek, aren’t they? Simultaneously, wearing a too-tight ribbed tank top and relaxed fit Wranglers won’t mean anything anymore. These sort of articles make me want to smack the [New York] Times upside the head and yell at it to try its hand at actual news again, you know, for a refreshing change. I hear there’s a war on. Secondly: This is a bad thing? We live in an era in which an active quorum of religious bigots would quarantine gays into concentration camps if they could (“It’s just like Guantanamo-only fabulous!”), and the Times is snarkily concerned that we can’t simply visually identify the gay guys anymore? Hell. I’ll happily wear a leather armband if it’ll flummox a hateful Bible-wielder. And I’ll let a gay man borrow my Wal-Mart purchased t-shirt, just to really throw them off. He can’t be gay---that shirt is 40% polyester! Yes, the gay can blend. Just like polycotton.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p143)
Professing to have a long-standing crush on an unapproachable girl, is, of course very teen gay. So is being verbally clever, slight of build, an active participant in singing and theater groups and enjoying Depeche Mode on a regular basis. And I took dance. Modern and Jazz. Oh, yeah. Add it all up and I was queer to the friggin’ core. The only thing that really pegged me as possibly being in the heterosexual camp was that I was a freakin’ slob and that in addition to enjoying Depeche Mode I was also a big fan of Journey. But as anyone can tell you, gay teens compensate for their queerness by doing things like, you know, picking a random corporate rock band to obsess over, hopefully one with a moderately cute lead singer. In my era it would be Journey. 10 years later: Creed (Today: Well, hell. All those new rock bands seem pretty sexually all over the map, don’t they? Have you got a gander at, say, Franz Ferdinand?).
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p144)
Here in the US, gay is the new British, which is to say that if people think you’re gay, they also think you are smarter, wittier, and more fun to be around than the average guy. Sure, you sodomize other men on occasion, but that’s your business, and we Americans always suspected British men had sodomy as a required subject at Eton.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p145)
Jesus was divine, but also human. He was a baby, he had to eat. Mary was the Mother of God but also a mother; she gave birth, her body pumped out milk so she could feed her baby. Mary suckled Baby Jesus. Deal with it. The response. We know she did it, we just don’t want to see it or think about it. And or course, the answer here is: Why on Earth not? Well, for one thing, it’s a breast—and we all know that looking at boobs arouses thoughts of sex. Sex leads to sin, sin leads to fear, fear leads to hate, hate leads to suffering. So we just can’t have the Virgin Mary going topless. The kids will riot. As you can imagine, this line of reasoning makes me giggle. For one thing, there’s undoubtedly a special seating area in Hell for people who have lustful thoughts about the Virgin Mary (excluding Joseph.)…For another thing, breasts being used for breastfeeding are unsexy in almost exactly the same way a vagina being used for birth is unsexy—indeed, it’s a vivid reminder that God, in His wisdom, evolved dual uses for just about every fun-providing part of the human anatomy, and that second use is definitely not about having a good time.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p166-7)
One of the things that really chaps my ass about the people who oppose gay marriage is that so many of them seem to believe that allowing guys to marry guys or gals to marry gals will tumble the entire nation into a festering cesspool of carnal inequity, in which everyone suddenly turns into lustful raveners who engage in group marriages with dogs and close relatives, like recursively genetic unfortunates or characters from a late-era Robert Heinlein novel.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p169)
I would suspect that on a day-to-day basis and in his personal encounters the man is normal enough, which makes him, like most people, a generally nice person to be around. I’m also sure that, like most people, he has his moments of irritability, neuroses, and supreme dickheadedness, which unfortunately for him are played out on the world stage and make for good news, while the rest of us get to have our moments of incivil stupidly in relative obscurity. One correspondent, in listing Dubya’s not-nice crimes against humanity, noted to me that the man is reportedly given to irrational bouts of rage. Well, maybe he is. On the other hand, yesterday I beat a malfunctioning phone to death with a hammer. So maybe I’m not the best person to judge someone for their irrational bouts of rage. And anyway, hammering my phone to death does not make me any less nice. Yes, yes, where I hammer a phone in a fit of pique, Dubya’s can bomb a country. But I’m reasonably sure they’d bring in Colin Powell to hose him down first…Dubya-haters want him to be evil because they perceive his policies to be evil…The problem with that formulation is that it’s totally wrong; nice people do these sorts of things all the time.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008, 173-4)
You have to be a really interesting sort of ignorant not to know that the Marines kill people from time to time. Your first hint: The big rifle so many of those Marines carry around. Your second hint: All those movies, books and television shows, widely available to the general public, in which Marines are shown, you know, killing people. Your third hint: The fact that the Marines are widely acknowledged to be a branch of the military of the United States, and militaries are likewise widely known, by most people who are smart enough to stand upright, on two legs, to kill other people on occasion (typically members of other nations’ militaries, though sometimes they’re not so picky, depending on country and context).
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008, p177)
Democrats: The attention span of poultry; easily distracted from large, useful goals by pointless minutiae. Not only can’t see the forest for the trees, can’t see the trees for the pine needles. Deserve every bad thing that happens to them because they just can’t get their act together.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p182)
Conservatives: Less interested in explaining their point of view than nuking you and everything you stand for into blackened cinders before your evil world-view catches on like a virus. Conservatives have no volume control on hate and yet were shocked as Hell when Rush Limbaugh went deaf.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p182-3)
Libertarians: Never got over the fact they weren’t the illegitimate children of Robert Heinlein and Ayn Rand; currently punishing the rest of us for it. Unusually smug for a political philosophy that’s never gotten anyone elected for anything above the local water board.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p183)
When you’re a student, grad student or associate professor, you vent in your blog; when you get tenure, you get to vent in a book.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p225)
If fear is hard working and has a goal, angst is like fear’s directionless cousin, the one that has a trust fund and no freakin’ clue what he wants to do. Angst by definition has no definite object; it is formless and ubiquitous, and it just sits on your head and freaks you out.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p231)
Heidegger’s writings are so famously impenetrable they could be used by SWAT teams in place of Kevlar; to the uninitiated, he sounds a little like the self-help counselor from the third circle of Hell (“Love your Dread! Embrace the Nothingness!”). Left unsaid is what happens after one has if fact embraced the nothingness; one has the unsettling feeling that it’s difficult to get cable TV. Also, there’s the question of what happens when on has reached a state of authentic being, only to discover one is authentically an ass.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p232)
Munch knew all about dread; first off, he was Norwegian. Second, he was a sickly boy whose family had an unfortunate tendency of dying on him: His mother when he was five, his sister when he was 14, then his father and brother while he was still young. His other sister? Mentally ill. Munch would write, quite accurately, “Illness, insanity and death were the black angels that kept watch over my cradle and accompanied me all my life.”
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p232)
“The Scream” is just one element in Munch’s epic “Frieze of Life”, a collection of 20-odd canvases jam-packed with angst: One of the four major themes of the work, in fact, is “Anxiety”. But even the more supposedly cheerful theme of “Love”, features paintings swaddled in depression and dread: check out “Ashes” or “Separation”, and angst leaps up and hits you like a jagged rock Don’t even view the “Death” pictures if you’ve skipped your Xanax for the day.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p233)
Given the choice between Heinlein and Rand, which would I want as a parent? Let’s posit that one couldn’t have both—beyond such a union causing the cracking of at least four of the seven seals, there’s a pretty good chance that after about 15 minutes in each other’s presence, either or both of them would have been thumbing their holsters. There can only be one Alpha Male in the room. In a shootout, incidentally, it’d be even money: Heinlein would probably be faster off the draw, but Rand would probably need a stake through the heart to go down. (Before you start: I know about Rand and her thoughts on force. But let’s just see her try to reason with Angry Bob.)
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p247)
When it comes to elections, you don’t let the GOP get close. Letting them get close just means you can’t see where they’re planning to jam in the knife.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p278)
I’m going to talk as a man here for a minute, pleading to any woman out there who might possibly be considering expending a brain cell or two on this whole “Rules” of “Surrendered Wife” angle of things. I will begin by saying that I can’t possibly imagine what the Hell is wrong with you that you’d ever possibly be considering something like this seriously anyway…Whatever the reason, stop. Just stop. The last thing you want to do is put yourself in a position where a man has total control over you. Why? Well, beyond the fact that it’s an irredeemably stupid thing to let anybody have total control of your life besides you, there’s the more particular matter of the fact that men, invariably, are dumb-asses. Big fat stinky dumb asses, with dumb ass ideas about every dumb ass thing. Why we’re allowed out of the house without leashes is beyond me.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p 322)
The Lord is my receiver; I shall not fumble. He maketh me perform the handoff, and occasionally leadeth me to the Hail Mary pass. He restoreth the point spread; He leadeth me down the field toward victory in His name. Yea, though I thread through the Valley of the Blitzing 35-Pound Defensive Line, I will fear no sacking; for Thou art with me; Thy offensive line of burly disciples they comfort me.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p339)
Think about the classic Sesame Street Muppets and you’ll know what I mean. Each of them had his or her own endearingly neurotic quirk. Cookie Monster: Addictive personality and moderate mental retardation. Big Bird: Esteem issues. Bert and Ernie: Co-dependence. Oscar the Grouch: Misanthropy. The Count: Deviant lifestyle. Snuffaluphaus: Hell, he didn’t actually exist. Kermit, well, Kermit was the worst, with his veneer of calm control occasionally exploding into random fits of amphibian rage (now you know why it’s not easy being green). And as for Grover: Good lord. He’s a psychiatrist’s yacht all on his own. Elmo doesn’t have any of this. He’s merely obnoxious and red and has ping-pong eyes. But get this: He’s the most appealing of the new Muppets. The Zoe Muppet, for example, has a personality of the sort that makes you wish that she were real, so you could stuff her in a sack and drown her in a river and be done with her….The first set of Muppets were created in the late 60s, when being freakish and weird held a romantic sort of charm, and there was the idea that maybe we should accept people eve with vaguely neurotic quirks. Today, of course, children’s quirks are merely something to be medicated out of them…The new Muppets don’t have quirks, and without the quirks, they simply grate. This is bad news for our kids, since Muppets more or less reflect their target audience. The solution is clear: Write to the Children’s Television Workshop and demand they make their Muppets more freakish. Do it for the kids. They deserve neurotic Muppets! Years from now, they’ll thank you for it.
--John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p348)
Some people believe bad chocolate is like bad sex: Even when it’s bad, it’s still good. This formulation is nonsense at its root. Bad sex is definitely not still good. It’s actually tremendously depressing, sort of like getting all worked up [sic] go to Disneyland just to find that the only ride open in the whole park is the monorail to and from the parking lot—and that the monorail seats small kind of funky. Secondly, bad chocolate is worse than bad sex. We accept that sex may occasionally be bad…but chocolate is supposed to be above that. Chocolate is supposed to be an absolute good. Occasional bad sex is regrettable, but bad chocolate is a betrayal.
-John Scalzi (Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 p63)
June 23, 2022
Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded: A Decade of Whatever, 1998-2008 by John Scalzi.
Mr Scalzi is an award-winning science fiction author who is one of my favorites. This book is a selection of his essays over a 10-year period from his online blog: Whatever. These are not short stories, just random blog posts covering topics that interested him at the time. Some are funny, others are rants, and a few serious posts round out the collection.
It will probably only be of interest to those that enjoy his work and want to know more about him. In it one gains a bit of insight to his views, a glimpse into his life, marriage & family, political stances, etc…
It was the Winner of the 2009 Hugo Award for Best Related (Non-Fiction) Book.
Overall, it was fine. My lower score (2 stars) is more a reflection that, well it’s a random collection of blog posts. Nothing wrong with that, but there was no cohesion to the overall flow. Just a snippet into a decade of writing daily. In the end I was glad I got to know him a bit better. I am now subscribed to his blog that he is still writing and I’m glad to have had a glimpse of the early years in this endeavor.
Mr Scalzi is an award-winning science fiction author who is one of my favorites. This book is a selection of his essays over a 10-year period from his online blog: Whatever. These are not short stories, just random blog posts covering topics that interested him at the time. Some are funny, others are rants, and a few serious posts round out the collection.
It will probably only be of interest to those that enjoy his work and want to know more about him. In it one gains a bit of insight to his views, a glimpse into his life, marriage & family, political stances, etc…
It was the Winner of the 2009 Hugo Award for Best Related (Non-Fiction) Book.
Overall, it was fine. My lower score (2 stars) is more a reflection that, well it’s a random collection of blog posts. Nothing wrong with that, but there was no cohesion to the overall flow. Just a snippet into a decade of writing daily. In the end I was glad I got to know him a bit better. I am now subscribed to his blog that he is still writing and I’m glad to have had a glimpse of the early years in this endeavor.
May 14, 2024
Eu não posso, em sã consciência, ignorar a arrogância estadunidense de alguns desses textos, então vou comentar estes primeiro. Como são posts do blog do John Scalzi entre 1998 e 2008, o ano 2001 está aí no meio e, em particular, a data 11 de setembro. Alguns textos são somente reflexões sobre como as coisas vão mudar, como o texto do dia seguinte, no qual ele observa que não passou nenhum avião, mas quando ele começa a comentar sobre guerra, militarismo e adjacências, o estadunidensismo começa a aparecer. Admito que não sei o que ele pensa sobre esses mesmos assuntos hoje, mais de 20 anos depois de tudo, mas esse é o ponto desse livro, eu acho. Os textos em que ele dá conselhos de escrita, tanto mais práticos quanto mais filosóficos, foram interessantes, gostei também de ler a perspectiva dele sobre ser pai, foi divertido ler ele tirando sarro do museu do criacionismo e de seus idealizadores... talvez a tiração de sarro seja um tico desrespeitosa, mas essa foi a escolha dele. Foi um bom livro, não sei se vou ler os próximos dessa série, mas eu talvez leia o próprio blog.
December 27, 2019
I was not familiar with John Scalzi's writing before reading this book, but from the title I assumed this would be humorous. Perhaps it is to others but it wasn't to me. I gave up before making it halfway through the book. The writing was fine, but the stories and the author's tone didn't resonate with me and we do not share any of the same opinions on life based on the entries that I read. Since he takes a very aggressive stance when stating his opinions, it wasn't worth it for me to continue reading the book. I'd say if you are sensitive on topics that deal with politics, religion, etc. this isn't the book for you. The same is true if you don't like a ton of foul language or if scathing sarcasm is not your humor of choice. If you do like any of those things, I would hazard a guess that you'd like this book as the writing was professional, the stories were concise but still descriptive, and the author is clearly passionate about his work.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 145 reviews