I don't really disagree with the thrust of the article, but it feels like it should have been written last year or something. There is a dated feel about it.
But, will the geek really inherit the earth? Somehow, I doubt it. I mean, if you put it in national terms, who are people going to vote for . . . Napoleon Dynamite or Tom Cruise?
2 comments:
I too find that geek-chic phenomenon appealing, interesting, and limited. Notice that this account was The World According to Meghan Nesmith, Middlebury College, not Jim Ordinary from Columbus State. When Gven Golly and I got rained out of Comfest (it poured downtown), we ended up seeing "Mr and Mrs Smith" at the Studio 35, and you're demographically right - most people would rather spend two hours looking longingly at Brad P and Angelina J (or Tom C, Ben A and Jennifer, et al) than Napoleon D or like-minded, like-bodied others (I can't name one). There's just a smaller market for the modern geeks, and the fact that I can't think of any proves it. Geek stardom is an oxymoron.
In a sad attempt at procrastination, I googled myself (I know, I know) and randomly came across this - a response to an article I wrote at the request of a friend a year or so ago. I'm not sure where this motivation to comment is coming from - probably the sheer amazement that someone other than my parents read this article - but I just wanted to say that I, too, found the subject matter dated. As a pop-culture enthusiast, the fact that I was asked to report on a phenomenon that had already reached its inevitable peak seemed slightly redundant. Also, the editors systematically ripped my voice from the article itself. Anyway, I suppose I just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to actually respond, in some form or another, to my first and last piece of journalism (if it can be called that).
Post a Comment