Jill, I canāt see the piece you link to because itās behind a subscriber wall. However, it appears (from the URL) to be the āLiking Is for Cowards. Go for What Hurts.ā piece that was posted on May 29. I had stumbled onto that column a couple days ago and was pretty impressed by it. I found it thought-provoking and poignant. Your post here comes across pretty strongly as a sneering put-down, and Iām baffled as to what caused you to react that way.
I don’t normally post, but I have to say I had the same reaction as Jill. Franzen’s essay shows that he is utterly unaware of the complex ways people use technology today to reshape and maintain human relationships. Perhaps there are a few techies out there who truly prefer caressing their iPhones to getting intimate with human lovers, but the vast majority of us use gadgets as tools, not as human substitutes. He also conflates technology with capitalism when he discusses the commodification of love. Diamonds as a symbol of devotion may be problematic, but they have nothing at all to do with communications technology. Have you told a new romantic interest you “like” him or her since the advent of Facebook’s “Like” button? I have–and I promise you the two uses of the word feel nothing alike. And what’s wrong with people wanting to be liked by others? We’re social beings, most of us derive pleasure from having friends and from social approval. Certainly that can go too far, but is that really anything new? He offers no evidence whatsoever that likeability has suddenly become more important to people today, in contrast to previous generations with more “integrity.” This is the argument of a curmudgeon: People these days just don’t value the right stuff anymore! Facebook, by the bye, may be an outlet for narcissism in the hands of narcissists. But think about what you and your friends use it for. Planning parties? Finding out what old classmates are up to? Seeing photos of your friends’ babies? Sounds like good old-fashioned socializing to me. Again, there may be a small crowd who spend most of their time gazing at pictures of themselves and pondering how amazing those selves are, but I’m skeptical it’s nearly as widespread a phenomenon as Franzen imagines. Maybe it’s just because I’m in a LDR and mainly use my super-sexy iPhone to have long, intimate conversations with my partner, but the assumption that we must choose either technology or love seems absurd and simplistic to me.
I read the Franzen column a couple of days ago also. It seemed to rattle around a bit, but I got his point–or at least I think I did. And I totally agree with his premise that our consumerist society commodifies love; that technology seduces us with gadgets that seem to satisfy our every whim and, therefore, are lovable and stroke our needy egos. I think he’s saying don’t just despair about our fucked-up world; do something–love something–act from that love and the despair lessens. Maybe I’m totally wrong
I think I get what he’s saying…most of it. It does sound like (especially near the end) like he’s lecturing a tech-hungry teenager on the dangers of too many online friends and not enough “real-world” friends. But I get his point about consumerism, I guess. He is sad about that lack of an iPhone, isn’t he? By the way, here’s a direct link to the article (I found it by googling “new york times jonathan franzen”): http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/29/opinion/29franzen.html
I enjoyed Franzen’s article…but I still get a rush from sharing (example: pictures of a recent trip or other adventure) over the internet…I agree with @jmf…use of technology for personal relations is highly complex and as much as I thought Franzen wrote an interesting piece, I dismiss the idea that I’m living an inauthentic life just because some of it is lived over social media (how else am I supposed to keep in super close contact with friends and family thousands of miles away? you’ve gotta use it all – phone, email, online, travel!) And remember! If it’s not of facebook, it didn’t happen…haha
I think most people are not very thoughtful in their use of social media, and I’m a little surprised to see such a defensive and dismissive response to the essay.
Your post here comes across pretty strongly as a sneering put-down, and Iām baffled as to what caused you to react that way. Without having read the article myself, I’ll volunteer that the words “Jonathan” and “Franzen” used together evoke a Pavlovian sneer from my direction. Also without reading the article, I’m going to hazard a guess that it turns some utterly insignificant peeve or opinion of Franzen’s into a vaguely moralizing indictment of American culture – if not indeed the entire world – and is couched in just enough equivocation and self-deprecation to hide just how self-satisfied and vapid it actually is.
I skimmed the piece in the print edition last week, and I seem to recall being put off by the tired false dichotomy between “real life” and Internet.
Tricia: Without having read the article myself, Iāll volunteer that the words āJonathanā and āFranzenā used together evoke a Pavlovian sneer from my direction. Also without reading the article, Iām going to hazard a guess that it turns some utterly insignificant peeve or opinion of Franzenās into a vaguely moralizing indictment of American culture ā if not indeed the entire world ā and is couched in just enough equivocation and self-deprecation to hide just how self-satisfied and vapid it actually is. PSYCHIC!
I agree with oldlady: Franzen says that there is something in a relationship with human beings or birds that can be painful, hurtful and disappointing, unlike in a relationship with a gadget. There is a tendency in the tech world to mirror our narcissism, so we can get everything we want when we want it. We have the feeling that we control our world. However, Franzen says that there is something else in the feeling of being alive that is different from the world of omnipotence. Learning and the capacity for disillusion is an achievement, and we are alive when we deal with rejection and pain. This tech utopia is a little bit like an utilitarian dream where there is only pleasure to consume. I wonder why Jill posted this article…
What Franzen says of facebook narcissism can be applied equally to all human expression…like writing pompous articles for the NY Times. Also, show me a gaget that doesn’t frustrate me far more than any human interaction and I’ll show you a concept drawing.
The distance Franzen moves in his article from technology to narcissism to consumerism to environmental destruction to love seems to stretch logic at points, but Franzen is generally a very profound writer on the issue of technology. His book “How to Be Alone” reversed a lot of the tired technology screeds that tend to receive the most attention in the media. I thought this particular article was thought-provoking, if heavy on the rhetoric and thin on the justification.
Thanks for the link Xeginy! I am terrible with names; thus even if I’ve read about him on here previously I don’t remember anything about this man. So I am guessing my reaction to his piece was somewhat different to people who have been exposed to previous douchiness of his? He’s not the man who wrote the ridiculous thing about how hard it is being short is he? *wince* Anyway, I actually rather liked the piece. He’s a bit in love with his own writing but I can handle that. And I think he acknowledges well enough that social media isn’t black-and-white shallow. I think taken as nothing but musing on the way our cultures (US, Canada, Australia, NZ at least) are developing in our relationship with technology it’s an interesting read. I love Facebook, to a degree I never expected, and it allows me to maintain strong bonds with people I definitely would have drifted away from otherwise. I do not feel this article is a criticism of that.
oh j-Franz. fun times. the problem i have with his article is that it offers nothing new. and its really shallow. its not wrong per say, maybe he overstates a bit, but its just dull. i dont understand why it was published in a reasonably well respected paper. technology is like alcohol, weed, or gambling. it just magnifies our neuroses a bit, it doesnt create them.