Further Proof Bacon Cat Will Never Die
Posted on October 27, 2011 Posted by John Scalzi 20 Comments
Ghlaghghee is featured in Gene Weingarten’s column in the Washington Post today. Enjoy.
Update, 5:08pm: And a rebuttal, also in the Post. Also featuring my cat. It’s a banner news day for Ghlaghghee!
Bacon Cat doesn’t NEED nine lives, because the first one will be infinitely long.
You could build many glorious magnificent bridges all over the world. The most beautiful avant-garde bridges mankind has ever seen,but you tape one piece of bacon to a cat and …
Life is hard,and truth comes with bacon
A Washington Post blogger comments further:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/post/gene-weingarten-is-wrong-about-bacon-cats-and-journalism/2011/10/27/gIQA1HFVMM_blog.html
O, Great Scalzi! What a stupendous picture of That Particular Strip of Bacon! Beauteous rasher! Has there ever been a more perfect balance of fat and meat? Never. Surely the pig who gave up that slice sits at the right hand of Arnold Ziffel.
Kudos to you for your impeccable photography, as well. The way the light delicately kisses Its porky magnificence, one can hardly see the tape.
The only problem we have is the mass of fur situated immediately behind Delicious That. A baffling choice of framing device, to be sure. Next time, please watch your backgrounds, lest you earn a reprimand from the Executive Council.
Good evening to you, and good eating.
I noticed the other day that Chang who !== Chang did not comment on the original Bacon Cat post. Could this be his(?) opportunity?
O Mistaken Scalzi,
No.
This is not what the Executive Committee of The Official Ghlaghghee Fan Club meant when we ordered you to present us with suitable images of Her.
wtf.
We do not care what some fool thinks about your foolishness or what another fool thinks is foolish about the first fool. And if we don’t care, nobody of any import cares. Do NOT make us call the Enforcement Sub-Committee to order!
The Official Ghlaghghee Fan Club
It’s a little bit rich that a screed about the fundamental unseriousness of today’s readers is illustrated with the Bacon Cat picture – which, however frivolous, was after all posted on a blog that frequently features serious essays, which attract many readers and commenters.
AUGH MY BRAIN! Sorry for the caps, but that second link in the post included a snipped of fanfiction which has offended my delicate sensibilities.
Why did no one warn me?
I mean ‘snippet’ of course. ‘Snipped’ is what I wish had been done to it.
What do you call someone who has coined a meme? I means besides “John Scalzi”.
I don’t think either of them know anything about the background of that picture. Ironic in and of itself.
Actually. I sympathize with the curmudgeon Weingarten. There is a deplorable slide in journalism, but I would posit that it started with TV.
Petri is entirely wrong. Marketing gives people what they want. Journalism informs people. Apples and Oranges.
I don’t deny that most news outlets are now merely marketing tools, but that is not journalism.
And if all the people who think otherwise give up, we will be in a very bad place.
is that a real piece of bacon taped to the kitty? i’m shocked she wasn’t rolling around trying to eat it.
I’ve always wondered one thing about that picture: Would it have killed you to remove Ghlaghghee’s red-eye? I do believe that sufficiently simple tools existed back in 2006.
I don’t think that’s red-eye, Hugh. I think that’s what happens when you put a cat on “Fry” setting. When the bacon’s done, the eyes turn green.
Nice to see surrealism making a comeback, at least in Washington DC. If only my
moustaches were long enough to wax into those shiny points …
Can you still buy moustache wax anyway? Cats probably avoid it.
Will
Now that it’s been pointed out, I notice that the Washington Post did remove Ghlaghghee’s red-eye. They probably airbrushed a few ounces away around the middle too, while they were at it.
I fixed the red eye in that picture, actually, not the WP.
Out of curiosity, what was your take on the actual article and the rebuttal?
I retract my earlier comment, then, with full apologies. I imagine that Chang/NotChang was pleased with the correction, inasmuch as it’s possible for such an entity to be pleased.