I used to rant a lot more here on the blog, and elsewhere. But today I find that most things in my small corner of pulp culture aren’t worth getting angry over.
These days I just can’t summon the rage anymore.
I still get angry. Very recently I’ve had my keyboard poised to write about that something that irritated me— Roald Dahl book alterations, ChatGPT-authored manuscripts spamming magazine publishers—but wound up saying, eh, fuck it.
It’s probably because I’m getting older. I turn 50 in June, and I’m not taking testosterone injections. I’ve seen a lot, enough to know that the small stuff is not worth getting worked up over. The venom I once spat at overzealous J.R.R. Tolkien or Robert E. Howard critics has largely dried up. I’ve heard the critiques, the spats, the righteous anger; both artists remain beloved and always will be.
I think this recent change possibly limits my writing prospects. The easiest essays I’ve ever written were done in a blind heat of righteous anger and fury. Thoughtful writing is harder. And on some level I fear that maybe what I do produce will prove dull, milquetoast.
But, in general I think this is a good development. Certainly for my blood pressure, but also because I enjoy the calm that comes with a relative certainty that the world isn’t caving in. People aren’t actually coming for your old books. AI not only can’t hold a candle to good human writing, but in all likelihood the next evolution of the technology will be authentication systems that reign in the current chaos.
I also know there’s nothing I can actually do about these things, nor do I know all sides of these issues, and screaming about it with digital ink certainly won’t help.
I can’t promise I won’t unleash a good rant now and then, but I’m going to continue to lean into positivity. If you want that stuff, Twitter serves it up 24-7.
Edit: OK, I am kind of pissed about Roald Dahl.
5 comments:
If the anger accomplishes nothing then don't be angry. Now, anger can drive accomplishment. Harlan Ellison made a career of it, but I don't think he was a terribly happy man. So it's probably okay.
As general rule, ask what will it accomplish before you do anything. It cuts through a lot of bullshit.
It is annoying what they do with Dahl though.
Thanks man, solid advice.
The recent fallout over Dahl is quite annoying--not worth frothing outrage, because in the end this is not exactly censorship, but a publisher protecting $ by getting ahead of thin-skinned parents (and secondarily, perhaps misguided belief that they are saving children from "harm"--compare the harm from a Dahl book to the iphones every one of these kids have in their hands, as allowed by their parents, and you will see the staggering hypocrisy at play here). But even if you grant that this is a rights-owning publisher wanting to do the right thing, the changes I've seen made in side-by-side comparisons are incredibly tin-earned and illogical, sometimes more offensive than the original.
We really should keep i-phones out of kids hands. My brother limits my niece's screen time which is interesting since he works at Apple. We don't know what these things are doing to kids brains.
Censorship and such is often illogical.
I'm only 37 but since having a daughter a couple of years ago I have learned to let more things just go. It's not worth the blood pressure spike and getting all worked up accomplishes nothing.
That said, all of this retroactive PC revising does make me appreciate physical media more. I love collecting old books for many reasons but an important one is that I don't ever have to worry about someone coming along and changing the text.
Investor Gator (love the name BTW), yes, one of the many benefits of having children is they bring into stark relief what actually matters, and what isn't worth getting worked up over.
All my media is physical. I never made the leap to kindle and its ilk, and likely never will. I find it too distracting to read on a device, and moreover don't want to be subject to the whims of a censorious editor.
Post a Comment