4 ms·

... why's it bad? I've repeatedly put in the work to appreciate things that weren't initially appealing, and it's been rewarding pretty much every time.

zug_zug 4y ago
Uh, because it's an obvious status-game with a pretense of intellect that fails to garner approval from normal likable people as well as the kind of person who likes literature, who will in turn feel obligated to out-Pynchon you?
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  I think... you're bringing a lot to this discussion that wasn't there until you introduced it.
  - zug_zug 4y ago
    I feel like that arrangement of words is almost conveying something.
    - coldtea 4y ago
      Yes it does. It says that a lot of uneeded assumptions and other baggage regarding "wanting to like something" as it relates to social pressuse was hurled at the grandparent, based on an simple suggestion for which work to get if you want to ease yourself in to a writer's body of work. The intention of the grantparent was simply to suggest some accessible work a new reader of said author might better appreciate. Regardless of that, wanting to "get" an artist and dig deeper into their work should be lauded, not scolded. "Social pressure made me read Shakespeare or listen to Miles Davis" would probably count as one of the best uses of social pressure. We could use more of that, and less of "I only consume whatever I feel like at the moment based on myself alone, I will never consider artists and writers well-liked by others, praised by critics, or part of a canon, and try to get into them". Which is solipsistic, besides being impossible in general.
- coldtea 4y ago
  And who said status-games aren't useful, both for the invididual and for society? Not just in that the individual gains status, but also in seeing status-seeking as a motivation for improvement, better social cohesion, and so on? Perhaps not all kinds of status-seeking are good (e.g. seeking status as mafia mob), but your dismissal throws the baby with the bathwater. It's a knee jerk reaction to dismiss status-games as bad. Evolutionary and socially they certainly serve a purpose.

zug_zug 4y ago

Uh, because it's an obvious status-game with a pretense of intellect that fails to garner approval from normal likable people as well as the kind of person who likes literature, who will in turn feel obligated to out-Pynchon you?

yamtaddle 4y ago
I think... you're bringing a lot to this discussion that wasn't there until you introduced it.
- zug_zug 4y ago
  I feel like that arrangement of words is almost conveying something.
  - coldtea 4y ago
    Yes it does. It says that a lot of uneeded assumptions and other baggage regarding "wanting to like something" as it relates to social pressuse was hurled at the grandparent, based on an simple suggestion for which work to get if you want to ease yourself in to a writer's body of work. The intention of the grantparent was simply to suggest some accessible work a new reader of said author might better appreciate. Regardless of that, wanting to "get" an artist and dig deeper into their work should be lauded, not scolded. "Social pressure made me read Shakespeare or listen to Miles Davis" would probably count as one of the best uses of social pressure. We could use more of that, and less of "I only consume whatever I feel like at the moment based on myself alone, I will never consider artists and writers well-liked by others, praised by critics, or part of a canon, and try to get into them". Which is solipsistic, besides being impossible in general.
coldtea 4y ago
And who said status-games aren't useful, both for the invididual and for society? Not just in that the individual gains status, but also in seeing status-seeking as a motivation for improvement, better social cohesion, and so on? Perhaps not all kinds of status-seeking are good (e.g. seeking status as mafia mob), but your dismissal throws the baby with the bathwater. It's a knee jerk reaction to dismiss status-games as bad. Evolutionary and socially they certainly serve a purpose.