Too busy today to find something subtly obnoxious enough to earn the esteemed designation of "DAILY SNARK."
That said, one David Denby has explored the past and present of the comments that make us snicker. Denby's new book, aptly titled Snark, dives into the squalid world of back-handed replies, the very moments when, as an observer, one can't help but let laughter break the silence of an awkward circumstance.
Dearest reader(s): I haven't yet had the time to read Denby's publication in full. But I assure you that once I do, I will think of something really snarky to quip about. And that's a promise.
In this past Sunday's New York Times Book Review, Walter Kirn offered the book's basis but could have been snarkier. But clearly Denby doesn't like snarky comments as much as I do. Kirn's critique:
Snickering at power has it uses, whatever Denby imagines drives the snickerers, and however he belittles their spitting prose. Playing polite, though, exacts a higher price — and one that Denby seems strangely willing to pay for the sake of . . . what? It’s hard to know. One almost wonders if what he so deplores about what he calls “the hunting of the snark” is that, invariably — given his obtuseness about the necessity of irreverent laughter, even if it’s rude, unfair or lamebrained, in revealing or merely helping to abide perceived arrogance and fraudulence — someday the snark would come for books like his.Ok, maybe this guy Kirn is snarkier than we thought...
Suggest tomorrow's Daily Snark at The Seminal.