Yesterday I posted an article for discussion with the promise that I would reveal my opinion of it after everyone had a chance to read it. Due to time constraints they won’t be eloquent or particularly funny, but without further ado, here are my thoughts…
The set up of the article is a copout. For example, in the opening the writer uses the medium of asking a friend a question to get across an idea. She writes, “So, a few days after the chat with my mom, when I found myself downtown drinking tea with my friend Steven, I asked him what he thought about dating.” Presenting an idea through Steve’s response to her question is a tad too simple and childish for my taste – Can we not be a little more creative? And not only with the way of presenting the idea, but the content - “I asked him what he thought about dating.” Fo’ real?
The writer opens by introducing the many different types of possible ‘relationships’ existing today and the undefined and often overlapping nature of them. Our friend Steve goes on to explain why we can’t be expected to be faithful to our partners – New York is filled with so many people that every moment is decorated with the possibility of finding a person better than the one you’re already with. The writer decides to support Stevie’s point (that there are a lot of people out there) and states, “For the sake of brevity and clarity, I’ll say I’ve dated a lot of guys. It’s not that I’ve gone out anywhere with a lot of these guys, or been physical with most of them, or even seen them more than once. But there have been many, many encounters.” But wait, wait, she changes her mind – no need to be brief and stop at merely supporting Stevie’s point – and goes on to prove Stevie’s point, spending the majority of the essay listing all the weird guys she’s been with. My personal favorites are the antediluvian in the graying long underwear (although she dated his roommate, not him) and the Jesuit who insisted on a little sometin sometin before the clock ticked midnight and it was time to go to back to church.
Sure, it has some entertainment value. But is this indicative of our generation? Do we do this? Let me rephrase that, since I know I don’t generally dig the whole tattooed knuckles deal or the late night subway construction worker – do you do this?!
In short, I was looking forward to an insightful and stimulating piece, and instead found myself a bit baffled and dissatisfied. There was no meat to the argument, and I’m no vegetarian. Maybe that in itself is the message of the piece, but if it is, I don’t buy it. That said, I’m optimistic that in the weeks to come, the published essays of the four runner-ups will be more thought-provoking.
5 responses so far ↓
1 Sarah Zimmerman (szimmerman09) // May 8, 2008 at 11:41 pm
I, too, was pretty disappointed in this article. Most of the time I find “Modern Love” to be an entertaining read. This piece, however, in addition to conveying the college hookup culture through examples of bizarre trysts the author has mostly away from college, made me want to stab myself with my crossword puzzle pencil a little bit. I didn’t really care about Marguerite or whether any of her would-be lovers stuck around, probably a function of the projected blaise attitude that she would have us, them, and herself believe. Of course, that’s not really the case at all. Had she not been such a sissy and let us know before the last paragraphs, I’m sure this could have been the “eloquent, clear-eyed account” it was billed to be. Yet, for some reason, she spends the bulk of her 1500 to 2000 words listing men (and, my goodness, are there a lot of them) rather than doing much of anything else.
2 Olivia Katrandjian (okatrandjian09) // May 9, 2008 at 12:41 am
I agree with you, Sarah - it would have been a more exciting essay if she had been upfront about it and not hid behind her contrived apathy. And yet, as much as I wish it wasn’t the case, Marguerite’s blasé attitude, contrived or not, is by no means unique to her - it is in fact quite prevalent. But why? What’s so cool about being indifferent?
3 dtemin10 (dtemin10) // May 9, 2008 at 2:29 am
I have to agree with both of you. I’m an avid reader of the Modern Love series because the articles are so thought provoking. After I finish reading a piece, I usually feel that the author’s perspective has given me a window onto the human experience that I would not have otherwise had.
While I sympathize with the essay winner’s inability to find a decent guy (and certainly the men she dates strike me as pompous, self-absorbed assholes), she doesn’t say anything new. She just blandly lists these ephemeral relationships (if we can even call them that) in a manner that does not go beyond the superficial. It would be nice to read an essay that more effectively addressed the hook-up culture head on rather than just fancifully skirting around it. I think she tries to subtly reject the attitude of “nonattachment” that she supposes is prevalent for our generation (an assertion which is itself debatable), but I the whole essay I wanted her to just come out and say that the attitudes that she was encountering were total bullshit. She simply refuses to say anything substantive–thus, my disappointment.
4 Olivia Katrandjian (okatrandjian09) // May 9, 2008 at 11:13 am
What do you make of the last phrase, “don’t ruin it” ?
5 dtemin10 (dtemin10) // May 9, 2008 at 4:36 pm
I think that phrase implies her acquiescence to romantic disappointment. Ironically, though, it seems like she is “ruining it” by putting up with the bullshit she encounters from men. Maybe I’m a hopeless romantic in being so unsatisfied, but her defeatism just leaves the reader utterly crushed.
You must log in to post a comment.