He’s the cinema columnist for Global Rhythm magazine, which I edit. I’ve been reading him online for years, so bringing him on board was one of my first acts as editor. I barely touch his stuff when it comes in.

well, sure: now that Billmon and Fafblog have gone silent.

(sniff)

I mean, sure.

(sniff)

WAAAAH

GOD I miss Fafblog!!

(Atop which it’s written in that certain almost flat-of-affect voice, slightly saccharine, often meant to signal self-aware sentiment – look how mawkish I’m not being! – but serving mainly as a signal that the author is working through pre-literary feelings, so to speak.)

But then with that last paragraph he managed to get back all my goodwill. Reading blogs (and the uglier the blog, the more I have this trouble – what a jerk!) it’s so hard to know whether the structure and seemingly hidden intent of a given piece are intentional, or are the product of a moment of realization in the middle of writing. If I’d read his post on paper I’d give him the benefit of the doubt and assume the neat little turn at the end was a literary strategy; because he’s writing at _.blogspot.com, I tend to assume he knocked this post out as it came. At the end I wanted to thank Phil Nugent – but didn’t want to save a copy of the piece. Let’s say, I was glad of the quality of his sharing, but not necessarily (not as strongly) of his writing. Does that make sense?