Lee Siegel is God

September 2, 2006

Lee Siegel!

Filed under: The Splendor of Siegel — sprezzatura @ 10:12 pm

Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…Lee Siegel…

Advertisements

Excuse Me, I Have to Go Feed Lee Siegel’s Imaginary Cat

Filed under: The Splendor of Siegel — sprezzatura @ 4:41 pm

Lee Siegel’s cat (aloof and self-assured, like Uma Thurman at age 16. Poor Maya! Poor beautiful, cool Uma!) requires feeding.

You may ask why I, spezzatura, must go feed the cat, when clearly she is first, imaginary, and second, not my cat, but Siegel’s. To the first, I can only state that the great Siegel himself saw fit to pour her a bowl of milk, and–what’s that, Mayachka? You would like some tuna, too? Well, it shall be done.

As to why it is me feeding the cat, to paraphrase Dostoyevsky, the formula two and two make five does not mean that I am, in fact, Lee Siegel. I simply am watching Siegel’s cat while he does what he does best–order his imagination around, so as best to understand the great danger of the baseball-cap-wearing, blogofascistic young punks like Ezra Klein.

What’s that, Mayissimissima? You say I should drop the whole act, that I’m in danger of appearing to be a few bricks short of a load? To use the vulgar blog term, WTF? I feed you, and this is the thanks you give me? If you weren’t Siegel’s imaginary cat, I would refuse to take you for a walk.

Of course, I am not Lee Siegel. For Lee Siegel would never stoop to pretending to be someone else–he is far too grand a person to do such a thing. Indeed, Siegel once noted the utter futility of pretending to be something one is not:

As for the dark Internet tales, maybe Stephen Glass has his finger on the viscera of the time. He has sensed that in a commercial society that constantly stimulates the libido and makes satisfaction the highest criterion of success, any shortcut to satisfaction is permissible. Lies become a consumerist tool. Their effectiveness as a tactic earns them the quality of truth. And the libido makes no distinction between past, present, and future. It exists in an eternal present, in which each successive lie displaces the previous one and becomes the only reality. In a different age, Glass would be like one of Nabokov’s madmen, deranged frauds who have an artistic temperament but not the artist’s rational will. In our moment, the Glass-type is becoming more and more common. The Internet must be full of them.

No question, this is one of the truest things ever to be written. The brilliance of Siegel proven once again.

So, Robert Farley, You Think You are of Lee Siegel’s Caliber, Do You?

Filed under: The Splendor of Siegel — sprezzatura @ 3:15 pm

Some two-bit hack derives some schadenfreude from Siegel’s demise, and credits the blogofascists:

Siegel is precisely the kind of voice that is most endangered by the blogosphere. He’s written a number of interesting things for a number of different publications over the years, but nothing that distinguishes him to the degree that someone would seek out his work. In the pre-blogospheric era, this was enough to help him achieve a mild degree of fame and a profound degree of self-importance.

One might think this would be reason enough to end the tyrrany of the blogofascists once and for all, but Farley doesn’t seem to mind:

It seemed to me, reading Siegel’s rants about the blogosphere and popular culture, that he was raging more than anything else at the loss of his own status as an authoritative voice. In denouncing Kos, or Kincaid, or people who wear baseball caps, what seemed to come through more than anything else was a frustrated “Listen to me!!!! Why aren’t you listening to me!?!?”

Well, why aren’t you listening to Siegel?  The man is only a man of profound wit and wisdom.  This Farley character may or may not be a pedophile, but I suspect he is, and that’s what’s dooming the Democratic party.

You’re Not Fit To Defragment Lee Siegel’s Hard Drive, Ezra Klein

Filed under: The Splendor of Siegel — sprezzatura @ 2:49 pm

As one of Lee Siegel’s greatest fans, I was truly dismayed to see that The New Republic has suspended a writer of unusual vigor. I truly cannot understand how Franklin Foer could silence the man who coined the term “blogofascist.” I ask myself: is it not enough that Siegel has created an invisible cat? Is it not enough that he, and only he, was able to discern the true genius of Eyes Wide Shut? Who could possibly make still the voice of the man who Uma Thurman was unable to seduce?

And then I realize: it’s those young, madly ambitious blogofascists.

Specifically, it’s that awful suck-up, Ezra Klein.

Kline thinks he has ignited in Siegel a “white-hot rage.” Oh, no, Ezra. Lee Siegel’s rage is beyond anything you can imagine. How do I know? As I said, I am a huge fan of Siegel’s oeuvre, and I know him better than anyone I can think of. Ezra, how many neologisms have you coined, hmmm?

You’re a wincingly pretentious writer, Ezra. And if you knew how much I knew about things, you’d crap your pants.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.