Nik at Nite: The Happy Reader Parade Continues!

Tuesday, January 05, 2010

The Happy Reader Parade Continues!

Here is the adorable Gillian Whitfield, one of the many very insightful posters on here. Like, seriously, how CUTE is she?!

But you know, it's the cute ones who are the most deceiving (think of Buffy)... she just might be our secret weapon against Evil Blam.

36 comments:

JW said...: Those cheeks are adorable!; 5 January 2010 at 15:57
Gillian Whitfield said...: Thanks Nikki & JW! I knew that there was more to life than getting braces: Sixteen years old and already a secret weapon against Evil Blam. I'm in on being a secret weapon. :) When do I start?; 5 January 2010 at 16:50
Marebabe said...: @Gillian: You've been missed around here lately. You and Katey are the two high-schoolers in our Fellowship, and that explains it right there. Busy times! Anyway, it's so nice to see you. You're a total sweetie-face!

Verification word: untra - the antidote for a mantra.; 5 January 2010 at 17:21
Gillian Whitfield said...: Thanks Marebabe! School is a busy time. I haven't seen Katey on here for a while. But then again, I'm so busy, that I don't have time to come on here.

Verification word: nomple. I don't even want to know what that means . . .; 5 January 2010 at 17:45
Joan Crawford said...: Aww! Not to go all "Mom" on you but I just want to squeeze your adorable little face and bake you a cake :); 5 January 2010 at 18:26
Evil Blam said...: Cute? I have no fear of the cute, eh! And cheeks? Cheeks I eat for the dinner — ask the Ambush Bug! What use is this "cute" in a world of... Ooh! Kittycat!
...
Verification word: @#$%^!!!; 5 January 2010 at 20:55
Marebabe said...: @Blam: I'm pretty scared of Evil Blam, so I'll tell you and you can pass it along to him... Brilliant! I am laughing long and merrily at the Evil Blam! And if that infuriates him, tell him he shouldn't be so dad-blamed FUNNY!; 5 January 2010 at 22:05
Adam David Dodd said...: hey just downloaded your newest book on kindle, no offense by ehh.. was my voerall opinion. not bad but not very insightful on the episodes it seemed more like a recapt aht barely scratched the surface which was frustrating because 316, lafluer and incident were some of the emgrossing episode of thseries, however your critiques of the literature referenecd on lost was great, a topic most posters tend to avoid. also thank you for warning about ulysses i picked it up but felt it would be tedious waste of time, but no i ma def gonna check out little prince.
overall 6.5
namaste.
adam.; 6 January 2010 at 00:35
Rebecca T. said...: Not very insightful on the episodes?! Not very insightful on the episodes?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

What book did he read?

I'm sorry. That was a tad snarky. I'll be good now. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion after all. And in my opinion, his opinion is wrong. Sorry, there I go again.

I think that Evil Blam has begun to infiltrate my head. Back! Back!

verification: messed - what Evil Blam did to my brain; 6 January 2010 at 01:48
Rebecca T. said...: And to Gillian and Katey - have missed you guys and your comments throughout the rewatch.

Boy am I glad Lost will be over before I go back to school, because I have a feeling it wouldn't have been Lost that would have taken the back seat.

What? Of course I'm not obsessed!

Verification: Rambo! Really!; 6 January 2010 at 01:50
Batcabbage said...: Overall 6.5?

Sir, I posit that you are drunker than I am, and I am drunk as all heck, eh? I must be, else I would not even respond to such malarkey. That's a real word, by the way, not a drunken one. 'Malarkey', I mean, not 'respond'. Ever see Drunken Master II? Man, that Jackie Chan. Dude can fully fight wasted! Either way, no offence, dude, I just thought 6.5 was a little low. Actually, considering the work and insight that has gone into Nik's books (not just the season 5, but all of them), I consider a score of 6.5 VERY low, and quite erroneous. But everyone's entitled to their opinion, eh? Too right, they are! Good luck to you, sir!; 6 January 2010 at 05:46
Batcabbage said...: Oh yes, and @Evil Blam: LMFAO Ambush Bug! AAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

verfication word: debutrar - the person you register your debut with.; 6 January 2010 at 06:07
Joan Crawford said...: Hey Adam, I just read your comment and no offense but "What?" was my overall response.
Not only is it not very insightful - it is barely coherent. I did like how you finally conceded that Nikki and her books are awesome.

What? That didn't happen?

Yes, it did, my friend - yes, it did.; 6 January 2010 at 08:08
Nikki Stafford said...: Ah well, you can't please everyone. I have to give kudos to Adam for having the guts to come on here and say it in front of everyone. Usually people just send me nasty emails saying they read all 120,000 words of the book and found one typo on page 126 and therefore the book was an utter waste of their time (oh, how I wish I was kidding).

I must say, though, that your comment is definitely a first for me. Since I don't recap the plot, thus forcing the reader to have to watch the episode for themselves, and instead ONLY provide analysis, the comment that the books only contain recaps with no analysis was surprising and new. Are you sure you weren't reading "Minding Hoss" by Mickey Stanford? Because I'll agree with you: not a very insightful book. ;); 6 January 2010 at 08:53
Batcabbage said...: @Nikki: Minding Hoss? Wasn't that about Bonanza? :)

verification word: inglu - a very sticky eskimo house.; 6 January 2010 at 09:02
Nikki Stafford said...: @Batcabbage: I thought so. It's why I bought the damn thing. But it turns out not only is it NOT insightful... it's totally deceiving. I give it 4.5.; 6 January 2010 at 09:10
asiancolossus said...: Adam, you sure have guts, gotta hand it to ya.

But sometimes the old adage your mom told you is true, if you don't have something nice to say, shut your trap! Not to suck up to Nikki on her blog but she has written one of the MOST insightful series of books on a television series. Have you actually READ the book carefully, she has facts and scenes in their with analysis that boggles the mind. Its obvious she has done incredible amounts of research and put alot of thought into these books.

Everyone has a right to their opinions, at the very least you could have been a little nicer to the author, more constructive instead of destructive, instead of "it wasn't very insightful, sorry"...

GRRRRRR

Verification word: snicups - developing hiccups after eating Snickers bars.; 6 January 2010 at 09:25
Gillian Whitfield said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6 January 2010 at 12:24
Gillian Whitfield said...: Joan: Thanks!

Evil Blam: Eek! Too frightened for words.

Verification word: collar. Okay, then.; 6 January 2010 at 12:39
Adam David Dodd said...: hey man, just saying how i feel, there were good parts, and less than good parts. i gave it less than stellar reviews because i've been many other sites that offer better insights for free rather in a purchased book, but that is not a fault of the author just my opinion. as far as not saying anything if it's not nice, that's not how debates and conversations work my dear thought police.

but i DO appreciate anyone dedicating thoughts, books, insights of any kind on such a great television show, we can at least all agree on that.

and yes i am aware of the typos, but no, i do not drink...; 6 January 2010 at 13:38
Evil Blam said...: I too admire your cojones, The Mr. Adam Dodd, eh! [cojones — from the Latin co- meaning "with" and Jones meaning "James Earl Jones (b. 1931)"; no-one knows fear when in the cohort of this gentle but firm giant of a man from Arkabulta, Mississippi, The United States of Soooth of Canada.] But, I say but, Dodd, you undermine your argument by typing like a spastic macaw. As someone who purports to be a writer, eh, and indeed has likely the valiant ulterior motive of channeling traffic from this comment through your "profile" to your "blog" where you discuss your "literary works" I might suggest that you pay more heed to the rules of rhetorical combat before you employ them. I myself, a man of little time to waste, visited your grey repository of prooose ("Look! The man with cojones has the blogging, eh," I mused, "i ma def gonna check it out.") and lo it was not a minute before I entered a parenthesis with no counterpart of egress, stymied by the punctuation of a period with the purported sentence that followed adorned with no capital, the uppercase allotment of the day perhaps having been spent in haste on entire words mere phrases before.
...
Verification word: spastic macaw — I ask you, What is the chance, eh?; 6 January 2010 at 13:44
Evil Blam said...: @TheMsWhitfield: Boo! Aahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!; 6 January 2010 at 13:45
Joan Crawford said...: Aahhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaahahahah!

Maria, Maria Menounos - help me! I fear I might have literally bust me gut!; 6 January 2010 at 13:49
Rebecca T. said...: @adam:

Did you perhaps miss the fact that you are on a free site where Nikki's fantastic and insightful thoughts and ideas are offered completely free of charge?

I believe that puts a rather large hole into your argument.

Although Evil Blam can often not be trusted, I will believe his warnings against the grammatical and alphabetical minefield he says is your blog based on the mildly incoherent postings you have listed here.

Verification: fropa - slang for that cold coffee drink at Starbucks; 6 January 2010 at 13:56
Blam said...: I don't talk to the guy, Marebabe, but it seems like he's reading Nikki's blog now so he must've got your message. Really, though, folks, I wouldn't encourage him. I know it looks like he just came to our ringmaster's defense, but something tells me that like he (like a certain character we could mention) has his own agenda.; 6 January 2010 at 14:02
Adam David Dodd said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6 January 2010 at 14:10
Gillian Whitfield said...: Evil Blam's evil laugh (directed at me no doubt) reminds me of when Vincent Price laughs at the end of "Thriller".

Nikki, Joan, Marebabe, and everyone else: I'll try to ward off Evil Blam (I can hear Yoda saying "Do or do not. There is no try" in my head) with my cuteness.

. . .
Verification word: flues. Two or more people with the flu.; 6 January 2010 at 14:10
Adam David Dodd said...: you guys are funny... hypocritical, full of paranoid delusions, and derisive to someone who goes against what you think... but funny; 6 January 2010 at 14:12
Blam said...: I can't speak for anyone else here, Adam, but I'm of two minds on your comments (and no, one of them is not Evil Blam's).
You're entitled to your opinion and this is an appropriate forum in which to express it -- especially if you're looking to debate the subject and don't mind being in the minority (which, if you've checked out the rest of the blog, you must have known would be your position).
I'd disagree that we regulars are quite the knee-jerk apologist acolytes that your third post makes us out to be, but of course it's going to seem pretty in-group here and, unlike you perhaps, most of us can't really judge Nikki's books without the context of (A) the camaraderie we feel and (2) the experience of having read and often contributed to the raw material that gets refined by Nikki into those books. That's where your second post actually undermines the argument of your first, because Nikki's recaps and conversation starters during Lost's first-run airings are entirely free of charge and the exchanges in the comments are easily among the most thoughtful I've found online -- this is just the right bowl of porridge for me in terms of size, perspectives, spoilage, all that stuff.
I only came to the blog after enjoying Nikki's first book greatly circa Season Three and grabbed the next as soon as it came out. Having been without Internet access for a time and with the Season Four book delayed, I gleefully read through all of her archived posts on that season before watching Season Five and finally joining in the discussion here. As I still didn't hesitate to buy the book when it was released, our judgments of her published work are clearly in opposition, and we'll just have to agree to disagree there (not, however, on how funny we are). I'm willing to grant that our shared experience here colors our reactions to criticism of Nikki's work, but if you want that criticism read as more than odd-man-out attention-getting then it does behoove you to craft it a little less sloppily.; 6 January 2010 at 14:57
Evil Blam said...: @Blam: Geez, eh! To paraphrase Rodney King, Can't you all just get a room?!?; 6 January 2010 at 15:05
Nikki Stafford said...: Wow, can I get people to come on here and say bad things about my books every day? Because the rest of you are totally making my day. :) Thanks for all the kind words, guys! I hope some of you were able to check out the Washington Post blog today, and thanks to those of you who posted something! It was so nice to see friendly "faces" over there. :); 6 January 2010 at 15:55
Adam David Dodd said...: nikki, one last thing and i'll quit this back and forth... what i said wasn't intended to be mean or a dis on your book, overall. 6.5 is above average. i think it all might have been blow out of proportion, you know people, myself included, reacting without morning coffee.
or has the man in back been influencing my opinions?
i wish you all the best...; 6 January 2010 at 16:16
Evil Blam said...: Where is the man in back? I turn around and see nothing, eh! Nothing!; 7 January 2010 at 01:26
Gillian Whitfield said...: Evil Blam: If that picture doesn't overwhelm you with cuteness, you ain't seen nothing yet!

. . .
Verification word: everse. The online universe.; 7 January 2010 at 11:57
Joan Crawford said...: @Evil Blam - you are the man in back. Jeez, for a Super Villain, you'd think you'd be more self aware.

Don't hurt me - I kid, I kid!; 7 January 2010 at 12:50
Adam David Dodd said...: @ joan, thanks for the save, you'd think for the razzing i got i'd proofread a bit better by now...; 7 January 2010 at 13:28