over the last decade or so blogging, many readers have written us noting an apparent similarity between filmS blog and the writings of mr malcolm gladwell. though staff may have sent you angry, offhand responses, or simply put yall on our spam-blocker list, we would like to say (on the record) that the comparison is not totally unfounded.
- mr gladwell is america//suburbia’s “ideas” guy — filmS blog is also an “ideas” guy
- mr gladwell makes hundreds of thousands of $$$ selling books…filmS blog produces roughly the same revenue as googley(.com) from selling adspace//tshirts
i have realized that exact area of contention we felt with yall, dear reader, and have come up with a compromise position, that incorporates some of your observations, and protects us from some of our ugliest fears. our marketing dept has made it into a slogan, so yall can grasp its meaning:
filmS blog…”kinda like gladdy, but “a lil” smarter”
am i sounding too pretentious? do yall think that i am secretly “a lil dumb” like billy kristol!?!? well if you do in fact think that, it may be because you are “theory poor.” gladwell thinks that yall have a lot of experiences: purchasing gasoline with a credit card, using a coupon at carl’s jr//taco bell, walking by “shoot the freak” at coney isl. and being like “what the…”, stopping and rubbernecking at “shoot the freak”, noticing the high concentration of mom//child duos shooting the freak at “shoot the freak”, searching desperately for a rationalization that will allow you to “shoot the freak”, shooting at “the freak” but missing, paying MORE//MAS money//dineros to “shoot the freak” again, etc.
the point is, gladwell thinks that your lives are filled with meaningful experiences, but that you don’t have the tools to necessarily make them meaningful. this is his job, as america//suburbia’s “ideas guy.” so what are these ideas, you all are wondering?? specifically, what is the big idea from this latest treatise OUTLIERS??? well, its a longer work, so there are two main points (thanks to julie, our adorable intern!!)::
- some geniuses are not studied by historians, because they didn’t contribute to “history” as much as other geniuses (think about tom hanks//forest gump).
- if you’re a computer genius, having a computer helps you. if you’re a musical genius, and you live in a very cloudy world of mud, tied to a pole//stick(driven into frozen winter shite), and never touch an electric flute//harpsichord, the aforementioned historians will never care about you.
****i need to “stop the journalism” to make a personal disclaimer. once i had this annoying professor who was “a lil” pompous//anti-semitic, and he really loved the beatles. he even went so far as to include the two beatles composers (lennon, mccarthy) on a really meaningful display of the 100 greatest composes ever, which wallpapered the music building. do yall know which “lil” college i’m talking about?? anyway, i felt like the beatles were such an integral part of this prof’s personal brand, that i could never listen to them//help virally market their videos. this is simply to say that there was a certain point in time when i would have been more sympathetic to a view that claims the rise of the beatles had little to do with their vision//composition.
thinking point/thought point/gladdy point:: does crema always float to the top? is $4.5 too much for a double latte? should i make my students read gladwell?