I never thought Fake Steve Jobs was that good. Among other details, I refuse to believe that Steve Jobs' reaction to the backdating "scandal" would be anything other than annoyance at how his time and attention was wasted on it, but FSJ worked it up to be this huge melodramatic depressive period.
But whatever fun there was in the blog was ruined when it turned out this guy was just another business journalist. Then it suddenly clicked that he couldn't get into Steve's head well enough to pull off the character. After that revelation, the flaws in his characterization became even more apparent--ah, that's why Fake Steve Jobs is commenting vividly on things that are fascinating to tech industry journalists but probably beneath the real Steve Jobs' notice.
Then it suddenly clicked that he couldn't get into Steve's head well enough to pull off the character
So, wait. When you were judging the writing based on the writing, you thought one thing. When you were judging it based on the guy doing the writing, you, uh, figured out that the writing was worse than you thought before you acquired some extraneous information?
FSJ was never supposed to be about what Steve Jobs would actually think about. It was always poking fun at what people said about Jobs -- and since the most prominent people saying things about Jobs are tech journalists, it's fine for a tech journalist to write it.
It's more that FSJ pretty badly mischaracterized Steve, but the flaws were easier to shrug off when I couldn't easily pin down why in particular he was mischaracterized that particular way.
Comments
I never thought Fake Steve Jobs was that good. Among other details, I refuse to believe that Steve Jobs' reaction to the backdating "scandal" would be anything other than annoyance at how his time and attention was wasted on it, but FSJ worked it up to be this huge melodramatic depressive period.
But whatever fun there was in the blog was ruined when it turned out this guy was just another business journalist. Then it suddenly clicked that he couldn't get into Steve's head well enough to pull off the character. After that revelation, the flaws in his characterization became even more apparent--ah, that's why Fake Steve Jobs is commenting vividly on things that are fascinating to tech industry journalists but probably beneath the real Steve Jobs' notice.
Then it suddenly clicked that he couldn't get into Steve's head well enough to pull off the character
So, wait. When you were judging the writing based on the writing, you thought one thing. When you were judging it based on the guy doing the writing, you, uh, figured out that the writing was worse than you thought before you acquired some extraneous information?
FSJ was never supposed to be about what Steve Jobs would actually think about. It was always poking fun at what people said about Jobs -- and since the most prominent people saying things about Jobs are tech journalists, it's fine for a tech journalist to write it.
It's more that FSJ pretty badly mischaracterized Steve, but the flaws were easier to shrug off when I couldn't easily pin down why in particular he was mischaracterized that particular way.
That he is back only shows that he couldn't make it on his own - he needs Steve Jobs fame. I could never see anything positive in that approach.