4 ms·

As a father of two kids who enjoyed this article, I clicked on the comments thinking, "I bet the top one is a criticism of PG." I don't understand how a predict

As a father of two kids who enjoyed this article, I clicked on the comments thinking, "I bet the top one is a criticism of PG." I don't understand how a predictable snide remark about PG's writing elevates this conversation. If the purpose of writing is to be read and to provoke thought and action, PG is a great writer.

omarhaneef 5y ago
Same thought. PG gets held to a higher standard than anything else on here. If some random smart person put up the same article, everyone would congratulate them for at least the effort. I can't tell if PG's (cultivated) simple style makes people think the "idea" is simple. In any case, even if people don't like something, they don't usually go out of their way to tell the author, especially when it is something as personal as PG's essays. This is something else PG does in this essay: he pays attention to his own feelings and sensations, and draws lessons out. Not saying you have to like that sort of thing, but at least look at it based on its own goals. p.s. I keep adding to this response but Russell's answer doesn't really contradict PG, at least not the way I read them.
- gist 5y ago
  > If some random smart person put up the same article, everyone would congratulate them for at least the effort. Some 'random smart person' or 'some random notable smart person'? Perhaps what people react to is the implied wisdom and halo around PG. That creates the negativity. It's the 'he's achieved something therefore what is being said is notable'. If PG wanted he could post same thoughts under some assumed name or blog (without having Trevor, Paul et all review first) and what people think. Also he is not opining about an issue where his expertise in particular is anything special. What he has achieved in life (that creates the halo) is not related to what he is talking about. And even in what his area of expertise is (startups or programming) he is not even close to being right most of the time (maybe programming because that is more science than art).
  - omarhaneef 5y ago
    I think there is something to what you say, but the "halo" isn't his problem. He should write as he pleases. He doesn't have to be an expert in what he writes. I mean from his own perspective (I assume, never met him, don't know him) he is just a regular person writing a regular article about something he found interesting. It is entirely the reader's problem if they put this extra pressure on his "implied wisdom and halo".
- munificent 5y ago
  > PG gets held to a higher standard than anything else on here. He's unbelievably wealthy and created HN. That gives him an outsize influence that doesn't come from the merit of his ideas. Critique is a useful counterbalance to that effect so that his ideas get a level of weight more appropriate to their worth.
  - lliamander 5y ago
    People joined HN because of the merits of his ideas.
- shmageggy 5y ago
  > PG gets held to a higher standard than anything else on here. This is a crazy statement to me. I'm sure you believe it, but I have the exact opposite impression: that if the majority of his stuff were posted anonymously on another domain nobody would notice or care. > even if people don't like something, they don't usually go out of their way to tell the author I think people do this because of the outsized home-crowd effect. His stuff is always (IMO) disproportionately upvoted here so that entices a reaction.
  - omarhaneef 5y ago
    > if the majority of his stuff were posted anonymously on another domain nobody would notice or care. That may be true, but it does not contradict anything I said.
    - shmageggy 5y ago
      What? Yes it does, directly. You said he is held to a higher standard, and I gave a (hypothetical) example of how he is held to a lower standard. HN readers (IMO) give an outsized amount of attention and respect to his articles due to the author's name rather than the quality of the work, thus applying a lower standard.
      - omarhaneef 5y ago
        We agree on attention, but the "and respect" part is the whole point of the what the poster I am responding to just said. (I get confused if that is the OP or GP)
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
raclage 5y ago
> If the purpose of writing is to be read and to provoke thought and action There's a LOT more to good writing than that, and in any event it's not that big of an insult to say someone isn't as good a writer as Bertrand Russell.
paulz_ 5y ago
Hey if the worst thing the HN comments have to say is "Well, he's no Bertrand Russell." I'd call that a pretty positive reception!

omarhaneef 5y ago

Same thought. PG gets held to a higher standard than anything else on here. If some random smart person put up the same article, everyone would congratulate them for at least the effort. I can't tell if PG's (cultivated) simple style makes people think the "idea" is simple. In any case, even if people don't like something, they don't usually go out of their way to tell the author, especially when it is something as personal as PG's essays. This is something else PG does in this essay: he pays attention to his own feelings and sensations, and draws lessons out. Not saying you have to like that sort of thing, but at least look at it based on its own goals. p.s. I keep adding to this response but Russell's answer doesn't really contradict PG, at least not the way I read them.

gist 5y ago
> If some random smart person put up the same article, everyone would congratulate them for at least the effort. Some 'random smart person' or 'some random notable smart person'? Perhaps what people react to is the implied wisdom and halo around PG. That creates the negativity. It's the 'he's achieved something therefore what is being said is notable'. If PG wanted he could post same thoughts under some assumed name or blog (without having Trevor, Paul et all review first) and what people think. Also he is not opining about an issue where his expertise in particular is anything special. What he has achieved in life (that creates the halo) is not related to what he is talking about. And even in what his area of expertise is (startups or programming) he is not even close to being right most of the time (maybe programming because that is more science than art).
- omarhaneef 5y ago
  I think there is something to what you say, but the "halo" isn't his problem. He should write as he pleases. He doesn't have to be an expert in what he writes. I mean from his own perspective (I assume, never met him, don't know him) he is just a regular person writing a regular article about something he found interesting. It is entirely the reader's problem if they put this extra pressure on his "implied wisdom and halo".
munificent 5y ago
> PG gets held to a higher standard than anything else on here. He's unbelievably wealthy and created HN. That gives him an outsize influence that doesn't come from the merit of his ideas. Critique is a useful counterbalance to that effect so that his ideas get a level of weight more appropriate to their worth.
- lliamander 5y ago
  People joined HN because of the merits of his ideas.
shmageggy 5y ago
> PG gets held to a higher standard than anything else on here. This is a crazy statement to me. I'm sure you believe it, but I have the exact opposite impression: that if the majority of his stuff were posted anonymously on another domain nobody would notice or care. > even if people don't like something, they don't usually go out of their way to tell the author I think people do this because of the outsized home-crowd effect. His stuff is always (IMO) disproportionately upvoted here so that entices a reaction.
- omarhaneef 5y ago
  > if the majority of his stuff were posted anonymously on another domain nobody would notice or care. That may be true, but it does not contradict anything I said.
  - shmageggy 5y ago
    What? Yes it does, directly. You said he is held to a higher standard, and I gave a (hypothetical) example of how he is held to a lower standard. HN readers (IMO) give an outsized amount of attention and respect to his articles due to the author's name rather than the quality of the work, thus applying a lower standard.
    - omarhaneef 5y ago
      We agree on attention, but the "and respect" part is the whole point of the what the poster I am responding to just said. (I get confused if that is the OP or GP)

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

raclage 5y ago

> If the purpose of writing is to be read and to provoke thought and action There's a LOT more to good writing than that, and in any event it's not that big of an insult to say someone isn't as good a writer as Bertrand Russell.

paulz_ 5y ago

Hey if the worst thing the HN comments have to say is "Well, he's no Bertrand Russell." I'd call that a pretty positive reception!