I know this comes late, but thank you, Luvh, for the gracious yet unnecessary acknowledgment you gave me in your Cesar Chavez post. I suppose I was "admonishing" you. It was, I'm afraid, well-deserved.
I'm writing to help you. I can't help but notice that your reader response is down. It must have been a true blow for you to have to respond to each other over the "Super-Saharan Africa" post. Given my gift of keen observation, I have a feeling I know why your readers aren't responding en masse the way they used to back in the golden days of February.
(I wonder if Dan would like to know what I've noticed. With the exception of his terse response to my superdelegate query of March 31, 2008, he does not seem to care about anything else I have to say.)
Back in February, The Pickle had a bright-eyed and bushy-tailed attitude. The posts had an air of wonderment and openness. You were inviting your readership to respond to you by presenting your ideas and information as suggestions rather than the incontrovertible truth or, on your less-inspired days, just plain news. Naturally, I'm alluding to the modest yet fervent editorial style the two of you employed in those happy days.
And while I enjoyed the photograph of the Vilnius Guggenheim, I couldn't help but wince at the bloggishness of it all. Luvh (and Dan - if you're listening), I beseech you, bring back The Pickle of yore! Your readership will respond if given half the chance to voice their opinions and weigh in on the big issues.
Your post of today made me, as Gene Shalit might rave, want to stand up and cheer. The Pickle is back and hopefully its readership is soon to follow suit!
It appears that you have gotten out of your slump faster than Big Papi his. Just a little genre-crossing metaphor for your reading pleasure...
Cordially, Petit Cornichon
PS: See "What a Flight!" for your incomplete sentence serving as a response to my superdelegate query.
4 comments:
Greetings!
Petit Cornichon here.
I know this comes late, but thank you, Luvh, for the gracious yet unnecessary acknowledgment you gave me in your Cesar Chavez post. I suppose I was "admonishing" you. It was, I'm afraid, well-deserved.
I'm writing to help you. I can't help but notice that your reader response is down. It must have been a true blow for you to have to respond to each other over the "Super-Saharan Africa" post. Given my gift of keen observation, I have a feeling I know why your readers aren't responding en masse the way they used to back in the golden days of February.
(I wonder if Dan would like to know what I've noticed. With the exception of his terse response to my superdelegate query of March 31, 2008, he does not seem to care about anything else I have to say.)
Back in February, The Pickle had a bright-eyed and bushy-tailed attitude. The posts had an air of wonderment and openness. You were inviting your readership to respond to you by presenting your ideas and information as suggestions rather than the incontrovertible truth or, on your less-inspired days, just plain news. Naturally, I'm alluding to the modest yet fervent editorial style the two of you employed in those happy days.
And while I enjoyed the photograph of the Vilnius Guggenheim, I couldn't help but wince at the bloggishness of it all. Luvh (and Dan - if you're listening), I beseech you, bring back The Pickle of yore! Your readership will respond if given half the chance to voice their opinions and weigh in on the big issues.
Yours truly,
Petit Cornichon
PC -
What terse response? I'm struggling to find it, and eager to offer an alternative interpretation as to my tone...
--Dan
Dear Dan,
Your post of today made me, as Gene Shalit might rave, want to stand up and cheer. The Pickle is back and hopefully its readership is soon to follow suit!
It appears that you have gotten out of your slump faster than Big Papi his. Just a little genre-crossing metaphor for your reading pleasure...
Cordially,
Petit Cornichon
PS: See "What a Flight!" for your incomplete sentence serving as a response to my superdelegate query.
PC -
Thanks for your encouragement. We're trying to capture whatever elan of yore may be missing.
As for my "terse" response, I prefer to think of it as "pithy." Appologies if it offended.
--Dan
Post a Comment