I'll say that the beginning of that article was somewhat interesting, but that's just cheap to go and grab conclusions out of thin air. He's talking in depth about some colloquialisms and about Star Wars. Then all of a sudden, he assigns these colloquialisms to specific, complicated contstucts and starts coming up with new conclusions based off of them, conclusions not supported by his earlier analysis.
If you happen to agree with all of his conclusions before you even know what they are, it's hard to disagree. But his conclusions in the context of this piece are just invented once his ruminations of Star Wars start to get dull.
He's hoping his analysis has made us veg out so that we'll blindly trust his new conclusions that LOOK like he is geeking out.
Yeah, so he doens't lay out proof for some grand new understanding about society. It's a column on an op/ed page -- I don't expect him to. In this case, he's not so much making a case as pointing out things he feels to be true; in this case, I agree with what he has to say, and I find it poignant. To each his own.
Comments 2
I'll say that the beginning of that article was somewhat interesting, but that's just cheap to go and grab conclusions out of thin air. He's talking in depth about some colloquialisms and about Star Wars. Then all of a sudden, he assigns these colloquialisms to specific, complicated contstucts and starts coming up with new conclusions based off of them, conclusions not supported by his earlier analysis.
If you happen to agree with all of his conclusions before you even know what they are, it's hard to disagree. But his conclusions in the context of this piece are just invented once his ruminations of Star Wars start to get dull.
He's hoping his analysis has made us veg out so that we'll blindly trust his new conclusions that LOOK like he is geeking out.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment