5 ms·

Isn't that what the author is saying? The deeper problem was that the wife felt that the authors' inability to do something so simple for her sake was indicati

Isn't that what the author is saying? The deeper problem was that the wife felt that the authors' inability to do something so simple for her sake was indicative of disrespect. Not acknowledging that your partner is worth a couple seconds of consideration is a pretty deep problem. The author probably demonstrated this disrespect in multiple ways, but the glass by the sink is a succinct way of summarizing the whole problem.

bachmeier 4y ago
To be completely honest, I got the point, but I don't think this is good writing. Did anyone learn anything from the article? Probably not. Did anyone do any deeper thinking because of the article? Probably not.
- igetspam 4y ago
  I did some reflection. I agree it's not a great article but I read it and did a self assessment. I don't ever want my marriage to end and people sharing their failures gives me another thing to consider, in hopes that I can avoid a similar outcome.
mistrial9 4y ago
for some relationships, this is a signal of animal dominance basically.. "do it my way, because I say so" happens every day
igetspam 4y ago
It seems as though people are focusing on the hook and not the core argument. The author clearly states his marriage failed from "death by a thousand papercuts" and this glass-by-the-sink is an example of not understanding their spouse.
- elliekelly 4y ago
  I’m shocked by how many people in this thread have been completely derailed thinking the literal glass is the issue rather than being symbolic of the issue. I always hated how much teachers would drill symbolism and literary device analysis into you in school but then I come across threads like this I wonder whether we aren’t focusing on it enough.
  - gizmo686 4y ago
    The water cup example isn't symbolic, it is prototypical. That is to say, it is meant to be a representative example of the a metaphorical paper cut. People in this thread are latching on to it for the same reason the author used it; it is not clear how else to talk about the larger issue. Different interepratations of the prototypical example leads to different interperatations of the larger issue. If you must use examples to communicate your point, the normal solution to this is to use many different examples.
    - trgn 4y ago
      We were replying at the same time and crossposted. You said it better. As a reader, I would have loved to have more examples.
      - igetspam 4y ago
        Agreed but the point is made more than once and in plain terms that the glass was not the problem it was an indication of a behavioral issue that went unrecognized until it was too late for self reflection to make a difference. It's not a great article in the surface but the message has merit.
    - elliekelly 4y ago
      > The water cup example isn't symbolic, it is prototypical. Thank you! I knew there had to be a better word to describe it but all I could think of was "exemplary" and that didn't feel quite right.
  - trgn 4y ago
    Great comment. > I always hated how much teachers would drill symbolism and literary device analysis into you in school but then I come across threads like this I wonder whether we aren’t focusing on it enough. I feel, the inability to treat the glass solely as a symbol, is more related to the form of writing. This sort of confessional writing, it does not tolerate symbolism well because the author is also the protagonist. The symbolism of the glass, in this article, it's more of a protective screen. The author explicitly writes the glass wasn't really the issue, but then we never actually learn about all these other things that were the real issue. Like, dedicate some paragraphs to it dude, don't leave us hanging! In the writing, he's a kindly, oblivious man. We get hints that he wasn't. Disrespect, what's that exactly, that can be downright cruel, where on the spectrum are we here? Beyond the glass, honestly, there's nothing. Like, was he rolling his eyes when she was talking to her. "communication issues", what's that, did they share meals in silence, or where they fighting like cats and dogs, but then making tender love to make up, what's going on?!?! Tell me. The glass really is the thing here. (Maybe his book has more, I don't know). For all intents and purposes, yeah, it was the glass. The reader can only understand their divorce in vague generalities, and since we get nothing more than the glass, it feels more like a distraction. Also, like come on, we need to hear from his ex-wife! Symbolism in fiction, functions more like an anchor, around which the mind can wander, which invites us to contemplate. And we can, because, honestly, right or wrong, it doesn't matter. There's less of this need to get it right, make sense of it. The motives of the author are just less important, a reader has less of this curiosity or nosyness, in the sense, that we're tickled to take a peek behind the curtain. I think, if the article were written as fiction, say a short-story, that glass would be great symbolism, and there would be less this need to come up with solutions, or try to pinpoint who was right and wrong, ... But in that article, I don't know, it feels more like a dodge.
- bena 4y ago
  It's because the hook is a real bad example. He's not entirely in the wrong on that one. While I will trust his judgment that there were other problems and that he was in the wrong in those, the glass was one where she should have given in.
  - xboxnolifes 4y ago
    > the glass was one where she should have given in Why is that the case?
    - bena 4y ago
      It's mostly an aesthetic choice. The only benefit of the glass being in the dishwasher instead of by the sink is that "it looks nicer to her". There's no real harm being done and it does not affect her in the slightest. And there's a real deep, dark, ugly rabbit hole to go down if one wants to suggest that it affects and harms her by "being unsightly". The more I think about it, the more I think the author is trying to be deep by being shallow. Taking something we consider mundane and transforming it into a grand life lesson. Creating a parable. The problem is that he chose something that doesn't work. I, for one, will not be buying his book.
  - vxNsr 4y ago
    Friend, the point of it being a “small” issue is that no one will ever be entirely wrong or right. Any issue that someone brings up will be viewed as trivial by many ppl, the point is to respect your partner enough to find a way to compromise. Sometimes compromising requires thinking far outside the box. For example, buy this guy a in-home water bottle that he alone is responsible for cleaning. Give it a permanent place in a cupboard. Boom boom everyone compromised and showed the other one “I care about your needs”
thisNeeds2BeSad 4y ago
There are examples though, were this death by a thousand pin-pricks is a attempt at "takeover" aka expecting to be in control of everything your partner does and using emotional blackmail should he not retreat at once. At the end of this, you become a stranger in your own life, programmed into the small details by somebody else, who then leaves you because you are "boring and predictable".

bachmeier 4y ago

To be completely honest, I got the point, but I don't think this is good writing. Did anyone learn anything from the article? Probably not. Did anyone do any deeper thinking because of the article? Probably not.

igetspam 4y ago
I did some reflection. I agree it's not a great article but I read it and did a self assessment. I don't ever want my marriage to end and people sharing their failures gives me another thing to consider, in hopes that I can avoid a similar outcome.

mistrial9 4y ago

for some relationships, this is a signal of animal dominance basically.. "do it my way, because I say so" happens every day

igetspam 4y ago

It seems as though people are focusing on the hook and not the core argument. The author clearly states his marriage failed from "death by a thousand papercuts" and this glass-by-the-sink is an example of not understanding their spouse.

elliekelly 4y ago
I’m shocked by how many people in this thread have been completely derailed thinking the literal glass is the issue rather than being symbolic of the issue. I always hated how much teachers would drill symbolism and literary device analysis into you in school but then I come across threads like this I wonder whether we aren’t focusing on it enough.
- gizmo686 4y ago
  The water cup example isn't symbolic, it is prototypical. That is to say, it is meant to be a representative example of the a metaphorical paper cut. People in this thread are latching on to it for the same reason the author used it; it is not clear how else to talk about the larger issue. Different interepratations of the prototypical example leads to different interperatations of the larger issue. If you must use examples to communicate your point, the normal solution to this is to use many different examples.
  - trgn 4y ago
    We were replying at the same time and crossposted. You said it better. As a reader, I would have loved to have more examples.
    - igetspam 4y ago
      Agreed but the point is made more than once and in plain terms that the glass was not the problem it was an indication of a behavioral issue that went unrecognized until it was too late for self reflection to make a difference. It's not a great article in the surface but the message has merit.
  - elliekelly 4y ago
    > The water cup example isn't symbolic, it is prototypical. Thank you! I knew there had to be a better word to describe it but all I could think of was "exemplary" and that didn't feel quite right.
- trgn 4y ago
  Great comment. > I always hated how much teachers would drill symbolism and literary device analysis into you in school but then I come across threads like this I wonder whether we aren’t focusing on it enough. I feel, the inability to treat the glass solely as a symbol, is more related to the form of writing. This sort of confessional writing, it does not tolerate symbolism well because the author is also the protagonist. The symbolism of the glass, in this article, it's more of a protective screen. The author explicitly writes the glass wasn't really the issue, but then we never actually learn about all these other things that were the real issue. Like, dedicate some paragraphs to it dude, don't leave us hanging! In the writing, he's a kindly, oblivious man. We get hints that he wasn't. Disrespect, what's that exactly, that can be downright cruel, where on the spectrum are we here? Beyond the glass, honestly, there's nothing. Like, was he rolling his eyes when she was talking to her. "communication issues", what's that, did they share meals in silence, or where they fighting like cats and dogs, but then making tender love to make up, what's going on?!?! Tell me. The glass really is the thing here. (Maybe his book has more, I don't know). For all intents and purposes, yeah, it was the glass. The reader can only understand their divorce in vague generalities, and since we get nothing more than the glass, it feels more like a distraction. Also, like come on, we need to hear from his ex-wife! Symbolism in fiction, functions more like an anchor, around which the mind can wander, which invites us to contemplate. And we can, because, honestly, right or wrong, it doesn't matter. There's less of this need to get it right, make sense of it. The motives of the author are just less important, a reader has less of this curiosity or nosyness, in the sense, that we're tickled to take a peek behind the curtain. I think, if the article were written as fiction, say a short-story, that glass would be great symbolism, and there would be less this need to come up with solutions, or try to pinpoint who was right and wrong, ... But in that article, I don't know, it feels more like a dodge.
bena 4y ago
It's because the hook is a real bad example. He's not entirely in the wrong on that one. While I will trust his judgment that there were other problems and that he was in the wrong in those, the glass was one where she should have given in.
- xboxnolifes 4y ago
  > the glass was one where she should have given in Why is that the case?
  - bena 4y ago
    It's mostly an aesthetic choice. The only benefit of the glass being in the dishwasher instead of by the sink is that "it looks nicer to her". There's no real harm being done and it does not affect her in the slightest. And there's a real deep, dark, ugly rabbit hole to go down if one wants to suggest that it affects and harms her by "being unsightly". The more I think about it, the more I think the author is trying to be deep by being shallow. Taking something we consider mundane and transforming it into a grand life lesson. Creating a parable. The problem is that he chose something that doesn't work. I, for one, will not be buying his book.
- vxNsr 4y ago
  Friend, the point of it being a “small” issue is that no one will ever be entirely wrong or right. Any issue that someone brings up will be viewed as trivial by many ppl, the point is to respect your partner enough to find a way to compromise. Sometimes compromising requires thinking far outside the box. For example, buy this guy a in-home water bottle that he alone is responsible for cleaning. Give it a permanent place in a cupboard. Boom boom everyone compromised and showed the other one “I care about your needs”

thisNeeds2BeSad 4y ago

There are examples though, were this death by a thousand pin-pricks is a attempt at "takeover" aka expecting to be in control of everything your partner does and using emotional blackmail should he not retreat at once. At the end of this, you become a stranger in your own life, programmed into the small details by somebody else, who then leaves you because you are "boring and predictable".