3 ms·
> "But eventually, we broke away—you, to join the funny kids, a group of hilarious and friendly people who could match your unparalleled wit and high-octane ene
by rendall 1y ago
> "But eventually, we broke away—you, to join the funny kids, a group of hilarious and friendly people who could match your unparalleled wit and high-octane energy...
That is not how people actually talk in real life.
> ...and me, to join the kids at the back of the bus, literally and figuratively.
People really do not make other people the main character like this. "My crew were shy introverts who were hilarious once we got going" is how people describe themselves: more description, adjectives and familiarity. "You were doing your own thing with the party crowd" is how people describe others: vague and sparse in descriptive detail.
This passage inverts that.
- windowshopping 1y agoThat jumped out at me too.
- neilv 1y agoSome people do talk like that. For example, the well-read humanities major analogue of "10x techbro" can effortlessly whip out a more sophisticated analysis or assessment, with better prose. And some of those will say things like that with one or more levels on top. Such as if they know the person they're talking with will get the reference or archetype, or the allusion they're making, and they're really saying something more. Like (just one example) it means: "I like you, and there's some literal truth to what I'm saying, but you get the real thing I'm saying, because we get each other, like not everybody can, and also you should remember to have a sense of humor, and I think you needed me to say it this way". (But I'm highly skeptical of people on social media, claiming "my young child just said: [something sounding like a speech crafted by the poster]".)
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- zahlman 1y ago> the well-read humanities major analogue of "10x techbro" can effortlessly whip out a more sophisticated analysis or assessment, with better prose. Such a person certainly can do so, but also really ought to know better.
- devilbunny 1y agoThis piece is in Vogue. Could have been in Elle. Ever wonder about why articles in Sports Illustrated go off on politics? Same reason. These writers, by and large, went to Ivy League schools. Their classmates were hired at the New York Times (serious) or Saturday Night Live (funny). They want to point out hey, I have a great vocabulary and know art and such, too. Even if I just nominally write about clothes or baseball.
- cma 1y agoClothes and baseball is a better occupation than making up rape stories to fuel a genocide at the NYT.
- devilbunny 1y agoMy wife hates the intrusion aspect as much as sports fans do. She reads fashion magazines to relax, not to get some political screed.
- aflag 1y agoMaybe it's a cultural thing as well. Boasting about yourself is really not something you do in many cultures. I don't really see a problem with that passage. They were just trying to praise whoever they were talking to while being quiet about themselves.
- rendall 1y agoIt could be cultural. I'm overthinking it. I did like the piece overall.
- aflag 1y agoThinking about it a little more, those high-octane funny kids sound insufferable. This may actually just be Celine's way of telling the author she finds her annoying.
- syncmaster913n 1y agoPerhaps you're overthinking it, or perhaps you're onto something, and the author invented at least one of the friends for the benefit of the story and wrote the "response" herself. But yes, enjoyable piece.
- pimlottc 1y agoIt was over Facebook. Some people do /write/ that way.