i'm hesitant to name names, but i think substack's infrastructure is a bit of a disincentive for straight criticism -- at least as far as, like, 800- to 1,200-word reviews of individual works go? followers have to opt in, limited virality, generally not very combative, pile-ons only occur when pieces reach other platforms.
and that's cool -- the newspaper review format doesn't make much sense here, and i enjoy watching writers go off-leash without concern for length or continuity. but i also find that a lot of the stuff...lacks arguments? similar to tumblr (i mostly missed tumblr when it happened, but from what i gather), there's no incentive for meanness, which can lend to surveys and moodboards
in oyler's case -- i sense she was trying to avoid the sort of snappy writing that does well in magazines/on twitter, and i feel this book would've really benefited from clearer arguments, among many other things. anyway just spitballing here!
I'm also guessing that a lot of the niceness comes from Substack's conscious effort to be less like Twitter which is all about dunking and sniping others to get ahead.
But Youtube video essays are just recorded readings of essays with unnecessary visual clutter! (Except when they're podcasts with unnecessary visual clutter.)
jia's been thoroughly uncool for ~four years now, her entire job at the new yorker was explaining memes to my grandma and she got chased off the internet in 2020, you can let it go lol
She got "chased off the internet" by responding to totally meaningless allegations against her parents IN THE RED SCARE SUBREDDIT, which had already been cleared legally, resulting (as she no doubt knew they would) in the entire industry uniting to defend her against literally no threat, saying over and over again "solidarity Jia" (!), and now simps like you still try to be her white knight despite the fact that she's successful, rich, and the most popular person in media. That's not getting chased off the internet. That's flexing about what you're capable of.
you're seriously misapprehending the dynamics here
red scare isn't some innocuous peanut gallery, it's an influential platform with die-hard stans funded by Literally Peter Thiel — the same guy who single-handedly shut down gawker. the allegations were public, and they were also wildly racist (you left out that last detail, but i expect you won't dispute it, either). in response, a bunch of people on twitter were like "ah, sorry jia," which didn't change anything, because those people don't have power. know who has power? peter thiel, and any right-wing billionaire with an axe to grind
that was five years ago, she's barely written or published anything since, and dimes square edgelord reactionaries moved in. this is the trajectory of NYC culture + media over the last half-decade. what's the flex? an extended maternity leave, at great cost to her career? all tolentino ever did was sell some books to the most boring coffee-shop millennials you know. that's a cardinal sin in your book, whatever — i said Trick Mirror was fine. your liking the oyler book is a bad take — because it's a corny, lazy book — but given your ongoing crusade, please know it's a fraught one, too
Enjoyed this review! Particularly interested in more of what you have to say about that “underwhelming genre” of Substack essays.
hey chris! thanks for reading, love your stuff.
i'm hesitant to name names, but i think substack's infrastructure is a bit of a disincentive for straight criticism -- at least as far as, like, 800- to 1,200-word reviews of individual works go? followers have to opt in, limited virality, generally not very combative, pile-ons only occur when pieces reach other platforms.
and that's cool -- the newspaper review format doesn't make much sense here, and i enjoy watching writers go off-leash without concern for length or continuity. but i also find that a lot of the stuff...lacks arguments? similar to tumblr (i mostly missed tumblr when it happened, but from what i gather), there's no incentive for meanness, which can lend to surveys and moodboards
in oyler's case -- i sense she was trying to avoid the sort of snappy writing that does well in magazines/on twitter, and i feel this book would've really benefited from clearer arguments, among many other things. anyway just spitballing here!
Sounds like transcripts of Youtube video essays?
I'm also guessing that a lot of the niceness comes from Substack's conscious effort to be less like Twitter which is all about dunking and sniping others to get ahead.
But Youtube video essays are just recorded readings of essays with unnecessary visual clutter! (Except when they're podcasts with unnecessary visual clutter.)
Tumblr may literally be the single meannest forum for cultural criticism we've ever had
dude this is good.
ah thanks sterling, means a lot that you'd spend time with my stuff
dude im just so fkn desperate for book talk that doesnt feel like someone trying to game the system at the same time. 💀
I’ve been seeing a lot of the sort of substack essay you describe and wondering what to call it. “Literary moodboard” is right on.
At last, someone with the courage to defend Jia Tolentino
jia's been thoroughly uncool for ~four years now, her entire job at the new yorker was explaining memes to my grandma and she got chased off the internet in 2020, you can let it go lol
She got "chased off the internet" by responding to totally meaningless allegations against her parents IN THE RED SCARE SUBREDDIT, which had already been cleared legally, resulting (as she no doubt knew they would) in the entire industry uniting to defend her against literally no threat, saying over and over again "solidarity Jia" (!), and now simps like you still try to be her white knight despite the fact that she's successful, rich, and the most popular person in media. That's not getting chased off the internet. That's flexing about what you're capable of.
you're seriously misapprehending the dynamics here
red scare isn't some innocuous peanut gallery, it's an influential platform with die-hard stans funded by Literally Peter Thiel — the same guy who single-handedly shut down gawker. the allegations were public, and they were also wildly racist (you left out that last detail, but i expect you won't dispute it, either). in response, a bunch of people on twitter were like "ah, sorry jia," which didn't change anything, because those people don't have power. know who has power? peter thiel, and any right-wing billionaire with an axe to grind
that was five years ago, she's barely written or published anything since, and dimes square edgelord reactionaries moved in. this is the trajectory of NYC culture + media over the last half-decade. what's the flex? an extended maternity leave, at great cost to her career? all tolentino ever did was sell some books to the most boring coffee-shop millennials you know. that's a cardinal sin in your book, whatever — i said Trick Mirror was fine. your liking the oyler book is a bad take — because it's a corny, lazy book — but given your ongoing crusade, please know it's a fraught one, too