{"id":925,"date":"2014-11-24T08:24:02","date_gmt":"2014-11-24T13:24:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/?p=925"},"modified":"2014-11-24T08:24:02","modified_gmt":"2014-11-24T13:24:02","slug":"even-jenkins-needs-an-editor","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/golf\/personalities\/925\/even-jenkins-needs-an-editor","title":{"rendered":"Even Jenkins Needs An Editor"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"jenkins\"<\/a>\"Tiger<\/a>As typically happens in our 24-hour-news-cycle world, word of the kerfuffle between Tiger Woods and Dan Jenkins arrived before the issue of Golf Digest<\/em> containing the offending feature: \u201cMY (Fake) Q&A WITH TIGER,\u201d as the cover language reads.<\/p>\n

Subtitled \u201cOr how it plays out in my mind,\u201d I presupposed that Tiger\u2019s characterization of the piece \u2013 \u201clike a grudge-fueled piece of character assassination\u201d — was in some way that of a guy who\u2019s expended immense energy trying to maintain an image. Jenkins\u2019s humor might be corny in its Andrew Dice Clay incorrectness, I posited, but it would be essentially harmless.<\/p>\n

Wrong. The unreliable narrator (or interviewee) can be an effective device for skewering its subjects, of course. Think of the design professionals hilariously parodied in Tom Wolfe\u2019s From Bauhaus to Our House<\/em>. The difference between that treatment and Jenkins is Wolfe\u2019s uncanny ear for the idioms \u2013 \u201cthat\u2019s so bourgeois<\/em>\u201d \u2013 and rhythm of the time. The stilted dialogue he writes sounds<\/em> like something they would say.<\/p>\n

In contrast, the answers Jenkins frames for Tiger aim to be as preposterous as possible. It\u2019s more slapstick than parody, with Jenkins having Woods insult fellow pros (e.g., Sergio), while radiating arrogance and lack of intelligence.<\/p>\n

(He even commits a typo on Tiger\u2019s behalf, part of a gag based on the premise that Woods mistakes Gandhi for a pro golfer named Gandy.)<\/p>\n

Finally, Wolfe poked biting fun at an institution \u2013 modernist architecture \u2013 that was ripe for the poking; and although many of its minions were identified by name, the joke didn\u2019t really single anyone out.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s impossible for me to view the \u201cinterview\u201d as other than mean-spirited and, in any event, ham-handed, regardless of one’s disposition toward Tiger. Reading it brought to mind a reaction to notices about lavish Broadway productions closing after two weeks of miserable critical reviews: Why didn\u2019t someone \u2013 an editor, in this case — step in at some point and say, \u201cHold on, this is terrible.\u201d?<\/p>\n

Not the easiest thing to say to one of the most decorated golf writers of all time, no doubt. (And no, I\u2019ve never tried it.) It\u2019s also true that Tiger\u2019s got a spotty relationship with beat writers, according to a few of them known to this reporter \u2013 not an excuse, but perhaps an explanation. Sometimes it\u2019s difficult to tell whether this stuff is written more for readers or golf buddies.<\/p>\n

But if this is in some way part of an attempt at an \u201cedginess\u201d conceived to appeal to a new generation of readers, it\u2019s not what you\u2019d call dead solid perfect. More like just a cheap shot.<\/p>\n

\u00a0# # #<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

As typically happens in our 24-hour-news-cycle world, word of the kerfuffle between Tiger Woods and Dan Jenkins arrived before the… Read more »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":926,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,7],"tags":[980432,53,224530,980431],"class_list":["post-925","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-golf","category-personalities","tag-from-bahhaus-to-our-house","tag-tiger-woods","tag-dan-jenkins","tag-golf-digest-tom-wolfe"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/7\/2014\/11\/Tiger.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/925","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=925"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/925\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":928,"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/925\/revisions\/928"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/926"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=925"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=925"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theaposition.com\/tomharack\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=925"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}