Immortality Begins at Forty(ribbonfarm.com)
ribbonfarm.com
Immortality Begins at Forty
http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2016/04/28/immortality-begins-at-forty/
146 comments
If that's all you got from the post, you either weren't paying attention, or are not ready for it yet.
For one, whether "you give a fuck for what society thinks of [you]" or not, what society thinks of you has implications for you and your role in life. To put it jokingly, "it's not all about you".
Not to mention that far from "narrow-minded pop-culturist bullshit" the whole post drives endlessly the inverse notion.
"what society thinks of you" is what (according to the post) ends at forty: society doesn't think anything of you, -- it could not give less fucks, to use your wording. And part of the idea is that you should care even less, and instead (cynically or not) become a culture-maker yourself, selling truth to the younger generations.
It doesn't apply to everybody. In fact people content with work, family life, and 3 hours of TV/browsing everyday until they die at 80 won't even understand the thing.
For one, whether "you give a fuck for what society thinks of [you]" or not, what society thinks of you has implications for you and your role in life. To put it jokingly, "it's not all about you".
Not to mention that far from "narrow-minded pop-culturist bullshit" the whole post drives endlessly the inverse notion.
"what society thinks of you" is what (according to the post) ends at forty: society doesn't think anything of you, -- it could not give less fucks, to use your wording. And part of the idea is that you should care even less, and instead (cynically or not) become a culture-maker yourself, selling truth to the younger generations.
It doesn't apply to everybody. In fact people content with work, family life, and 3 hours of TV/browsing everyday until they die at 80 won't even understand the thing.
What I got from the post was mostly that the author thinks very highly of their own cleverness. The actual point was not really clear.
>What I got from the post was mostly that the author thinks very highly of their own cleverness.
Well, this is Hacker News. Ever read a PG essay? Besides, 90% of us think very highly of our own cleverness anyway.
The author just doesn't assume readers need his post feed to them, and goes on as if talking to his peers.
>The actual point was not really clear.
Don't know, it was quite clear to me -- even though it's the first time I've chanced on the guy, and he seems to have a specific set of references, inside jokes and prior posts on similar issues...
Well, this is Hacker News. Ever read a PG essay? Besides, 90% of us think very highly of our own cleverness anyway.
The author just doesn't assume readers need his post feed to them, and goes on as if talking to his peers.
>The actual point was not really clear.
Don't know, it was quite clear to me -- even though it's the first time I've chanced on the guy, and he seems to have a specific set of references, inside jokes and prior posts on similar issues...
Well, perhaps you share his cultural context, then; I clearly do not, since he begins with statements which simply are not compatible with my experience of life and builds on them in ways which do not make any sense from my perspective on the world. I gave up halfway in, because he had gone so far off into his own self-referential argument that I could no longer even parse what he was trying to say.
Probably the former. I got that there's other ideas in there, but the writing was too clever and self-important for me to take seriously.
Exactly. I think the OP takes a wrong turn in thinking "meaning" arises in relationship to "society", and declaring that "meaning is a game." Society is a game. As people grow up and find their own individual meaning in their pursuits and relationships, they stop caring so much about society and may sign out of the game completely.
The majority of people over 40 are not out there "making meaning" (the author's terminology for "influencing pop culture"), and that's just fine.
The majority of people over 40 are not out there "making meaning" (the author's terminology for "influencing pop culture"), and that's just fine.
If you're successful person, you can already give a damn about what others think. When you're not that succesful, maybe it matters then.
[deleted]
Well, I wish you luck the next time you go looking for VC
most of that money goes to middle aged white guys, despite what you see in the media. old white guys getting money isn't newsworthy.
Repeat after me: "I am not my work".
You're not your fucking khakis
I'm not sure others got this reference :o)
Where are their minds...?
Where are their minds...?
"I am Jack's broken heart"
Fight Club people, come on
Fight Club people, come on
People over 40 usually have been around long enough to be able raise a bit of money without pitching to VCs. Hell if you're 40 you might even have enough equity in your house to fund it yourself.
And you might have a couple of kids in middle school and not want to take such a chance on your family finances.
Assuming someone needs or cares about VC because they work in Silicon Valley is like assuming they belong to a yacht club because they're wearing a polo shirt.
This makes me wildly curious if anyone has any rough statistics on what proportion of tech in SF is VC supported. I'm sure its incredibly nuanced and would be only a ballpark, but it would still be interesting.
Jesus Christ....
This article is, from my perspective as a 36 year old, a poorly aimed arrow from a far away location. It isn't even wrong; it didn't start out from anywhere I recognize.
If you're living in the middle of a sea of what you recognize as cultural signifiers, and it slowly dawns on you that those cultural signifiers swarm and bubble around a particular age cohort, I guess the experience of drifting out of that age cohort can be disorientating.
But I don't even agree with what this chap seems to recognize as culture - it's mostly froth, mostly commercial pablum - and it never gripped me much. But I can only guess at this, because he isn't precise enough to define his terms.
The search for meaning in my life came to me in my late teens, and was over by the time I was 25. The meaning I found was not derived from the attention or efforts of other people. I don't expect a decline in marketing of cultural objects towards me, because I've never been much of a target for cultural object marketing that was targeted to the 15-40 age cohort.
I don't watch much TV, I don't watch many movies, I don't go to music events, I don't visit the gym, and I generally feel quite comfortable in life. I don't feel pressure to try and appear young. I've never got much dating advice because I never spent much time dating. The world this chap seems to have been living in (as near as I can tell) is almost unrecognizable to me.
As near as I can tell, the chap has just discovered existential angst. Welcome to late adolesence, is all I can say.
If you're living in the middle of a sea of what you recognize as cultural signifiers, and it slowly dawns on you that those cultural signifiers swarm and bubble around a particular age cohort, I guess the experience of drifting out of that age cohort can be disorientating.
But I don't even agree with what this chap seems to recognize as culture - it's mostly froth, mostly commercial pablum - and it never gripped me much. But I can only guess at this, because he isn't precise enough to define his terms.
The search for meaning in my life came to me in my late teens, and was over by the time I was 25. The meaning I found was not derived from the attention or efforts of other people. I don't expect a decline in marketing of cultural objects towards me, because I've never been much of a target for cultural object marketing that was targeted to the 15-40 age cohort.
I don't watch much TV, I don't watch many movies, I don't go to music events, I don't visit the gym, and I generally feel quite comfortable in life. I don't feel pressure to try and appear young. I've never got much dating advice because I never spent much time dating. The world this chap seems to have been living in (as near as I can tell) is almost unrecognizable to me.
As near as I can tell, the chap has just discovered existential angst. Welcome to late adolesence, is all I can say.
This might be a bit more compelling if you were > 40. Most 40 year olds who are engaged with others en masse probably recognize what this guy is trying to say.
To change this logic, I think we need to change mass culture. Simply being more mature in the way you talk about, is nice, but it also means you can't participate on an even playing ground (again, en masse)
To change this logic, I think we need to change mass culture. Simply being more mature in the way you talk about, is nice, but it also means you can't participate on an even playing ground (again, en masse)
I'm over 40 and I didn't understand this post. Maybe someone else can summarize it.
I think the only dirty secret when it comes to passing 40 as a software developer is that you become more and more in the minority and notice that there is a greater percentage of older people looking for work. So- it's a little scary.
I think the only dirty secret when it comes to passing 40 as a software developer is that you become more and more in the minority and notice that there is a greater percentage of older people looking for work. So- it's a little scary.
As an over-40 developer, I haven't really experienced that latter. However, I have experienced the feeling that I've passed my due-date, culturally, in more-or-less the way the article describes. People look to me to provide answers, now, even when I don't know them off the top of my head, and accept my answers as correct even when I preface them with conditionals and hedging. I know exactly the feeling that I am now responsible for creating culture for those under 30.
People have been looking to me to provide professional answers almost since I started my career - I've historically been the best, or one of the best, developers everywhere I worked.
Younger people I've known are typically headstrong in the ignorant way of youth - they can't help it, they don't know what they don't know. I haven't seen young people pay particular attention to what older people say.
But young people aren't usually very interesting, so not being culturally relevant to them doesn't really affect me in any way.
Younger people I've known are typically headstrong in the ignorant way of youth - they can't help it, they don't know what they don't know. I haven't seen young people pay particular attention to what older people say.
But young people aren't usually very interesting, so not being culturally relevant to them doesn't really affect me in any way.
[deleted]
younger developers are asking you questions? Don't they know everything?
If you the article is about existential angst (something like "the difficulty in searching for meaning"), I'm not sure it "clicked" for you; it's essentially the opposite of mere existential angst - it's about realizing something crucial about cultural meaning.
I used to really like his writing, especially the series of articles he wrote about The Office. But these days I find him too insufferable to read. It has jumped the shark where everything is now how to be meta about being meta. At the same time I still continue to enjoy reading essays written by Paul Graham since his words are backed by real experience derived from practice, rather than philosophizing for just the sake of it.
I enjoyed Tempo very much. Haven't read much else by him, but this article is almost ironically self-unaware in its sweeping generalizations. For a guy who once wrote that simple 2nd order systems should be considered as weather systems (coincidentally I was pondering these words all day today!), his "banded" view on age vis-a-vis "society" is unnuanced. Surely he realizes that society, including the culture industry, is comprised of people interlocking at all levels and ages, but this reads like someone who just realized that older people have capital to invest and younger people have time to burn. V.R. must surely have put that together earlier?
It's as if to comprehend this essay, your definition of "culture" must be constrained to "pop music." If he doesn't believe that people >=40 have meanings manufactured for them, just pick up the NYT for example... The same with sports cars, fancy homes. Perhaps he's simply out of touch with "stuff people over 40 like." The entirety of child-raising, college-funding etc. is all part of culture...
It's as if to comprehend this essay, your definition of "culture" must be constrained to "pop music." If he doesn't believe that people >=40 have meanings manufactured for them, just pick up the NYT for example... The same with sports cars, fancy homes. Perhaps he's simply out of touch with "stuff people over 40 like." The entirety of child-raising, college-funding etc. is all part of culture...
Oh man, is THAT who the author is? Yeah, the Gervais Principle is brilliant writing.
He didn't provide any empirical evidence with this article. He's just proselytizing about... whatever.
This article sucks. I guess he must be a has-been now. Does that count as empirical evidence? Studies with a sample size of N=1 don't really count.
Oh well, can't win 'em all.
He didn't provide any empirical evidence with this article. He's just proselytizing about... whatever.
This article sucks. I guess he must be a has-been now. Does that count as empirical evidence? Studies with a sample size of N=1 don't really count.
Oh well, can't win 'em all.
"40 > 40: Has-been"
Am guessing he just turned 40. Cue the paeans to turning old!
Wow, this is amazing! Everyone here is reacting exactly the way the OP's theory would predict. Those under (approximately) 40 rave against the article. They still have a sense of meaning. Those who are at the apex of 40 are depressed by it, they still bemone the loss of meaning. Those over 40 and past the transition like myself find the article to be great and not depressing at all, just a bit of gallows humor.
Granted it's a young crowd and the young are a noisy bunch, so you expect the comments to skew towards the dissenting view.
Really fantastic result, and article. Thanks. I found it eminensly helpful.
Granted it's a young crowd and the young are a noisy bunch, so you expect the comments to skew towards the dissenting view.
Really fantastic result, and article. Thanks. I found it eminensly helpful.
I'll add...
If you find yourself disagreeing with this article, or depressed by what seems like a cynical outlook consider this example.
If you are a child who believes in Santa. Would you not rave against a world in which Santa no longer exists?
If you were a child who just learned or is starting to suspect that Santa does not exist would you not be depressed about that? Would you not think parents so cynical to fake all of these stores?
But if you are the parent who already knows these things, it's neither good or bad, it's just a nice story to tell the kids, and see their eyes light up with images of elves and winter wonder lands.
This article isn't depressing or cynical. In fact it might be quite the clever meaning game for the over 40 set, just like Santa Claus is for parents.
... And what is Santa Claus if not a cultural construct of meaning. As the author says, this isn't a bad thing.
If you find yourself disagreeing with this article, or depressed by what seems like a cynical outlook consider this example.
If you are a child who believes in Santa. Would you not rave against a world in which Santa no longer exists?
If you were a child who just learned or is starting to suspect that Santa does not exist would you not be depressed about that? Would you not think parents so cynical to fake all of these stores?
But if you are the parent who already knows these things, it's neither good or bad, it's just a nice story to tell the kids, and see their eyes light up with images of elves and winter wonder lands.
This article isn't depressing or cynical. In fact it might be quite the clever meaning game for the over 40 set, just like Santa Claus is for parents.
... And what is Santa Claus if not a cultural construct of meaning. As the author says, this isn't a bad thing.
[deleted]
...and if you find yourself trying to explain concepts that took you forty years to understand... then you probably only recently turned forty. :)
I'm on the cusp. Just turned 40. The only thing I find depressing about this article is how it rambles on and on in its pseudo intellectual tone. It's mostly erudite fluff sprinkled with aphorisms.
I'm well under forty and enjoyed the article immensely.
While that normally would disprove your observation, it's probably just the dubious honor of falling within one of the article's "well-known fucked-up life scripts" (I'm going with 40 < 40).
You're right though, there is a lot of negative sentiment towards the article—some of it bordering on pure vitriol. Those people would do well to not take it so seriously. It's basically gallows humor, as you said.
While that normally would disprove your observation, it's probably just the dubious honor of falling within one of the article's "well-known fucked-up life scripts" (I'm going with 40 < 40).
You're right though, there is a lot of negative sentiment towards the article—some of it bordering on pure vitriol. Those people would do well to not take it so seriously. It's basically gallows humor, as you said.
I will turn 40 later this summer, and I am reacting in none of those ways; I simply can't get enough meaning out of the writer's highly coded stylization to understand whether there is a point worth reacting to. What little I can get out of it sounds like a translation from a foreign culture; I don't live in the author's world.
What a self indulgent outpouring of sanctimonious and facile drivel.
Mortality sucks, and meaning is a personal journey. I appreciate the urge to share meaning and truth but anyone who's truly long in the tooth will know well that the only way to know the path is to walk it.
Mortality sucks, and meaning is a personal journey. I appreciate the urge to share meaning and truth but anyone who's truly long in the tooth will know well that the only way to know the path is to walk it.
There's no path -- that's what the article is about.
And that doesn't change whether the journey is personal or collective.
At best one can kid themselves.
And that doesn't change whether the journey is personal or collective.
At best one can kid themselves.
"The path" is a metaphor for the life you lead. We all lead a different life, we all walk a different path.
Some find meaning, some don't. Some need meaning, some don't.
Some go on the Internet and preach, some don't.
Some find meaning, some don't. Some need meaning, some don't.
Some go on the Internet and preach, some don't.
At 30 I enjoyed this but have a certain criticism in mind. I do recognize that my frenzied "quest for meaning" is fading a bit as I settle into habit, but I'm also certain that that doesn't mean that I'm in a better place. I just have to look at my own parents to know that being too stuck in your ways is like a state of death manifest in everyday entropy, pardoned by believing that the entropy is a temporary illness and "normal" will return tomorrow without urgency.
It is the changes in life that make it lively, and so to live I should strive to maintain some rate of change in myself, so that I never die while still alive.
It is the changes in life that make it lively, and so to live I should strive to maintain some rate of change in myself, so that I never die while still alive.
Not too badly said. Not too badly said at all.
For a 30 year old.
(I'm kidding! I actually rather liked your comment.)
For a 30 year old.
(I'm kidding! I actually rather liked your comment.)
How old are you?
38 in a couple days here. I feel like I'm accelerating to 40, not traveling at a fixed velocity.
I am surprised and relieved at the abundance of other 35-give-or-take folks reacting positively to this article. It was a tough read but somehow funny and true at the same time. As I rapidly approach 40, I find myself going through a similar series of midlife, nihilistic trends of thinking.
Though I bet the author would disagree (as this piece seems a lot like an attempt at Explaining Everything -- therefore, how can you refute it?), I think this kind of thinking is largely driven by unprecedented inequality and the apparent reality that we are on the brink of destroying the planet.
Though I bet the author would disagree (as this piece seems a lot like an attempt at Explaining Everything -- therefore, how can you refute it?), I think this kind of thinking is largely driven by unprecedented inequality and the apparent reality that we are on the brink of destroying the planet.
"As I rapidly approach 40..."
Seriously this train needs to slow down. I know people tend to be happiest in their 60s, 70s, and 80s, but unlike many people, I do live with some regrets surrounding my 20s, and would like a bit more time in Youngeville. Doubt I can make up for it all, life is what it has become in many ways, grass is greener and so on, but yeah... Wish I could be as content as some of the commenters here.
Seriously this train needs to slow down. I know people tend to be happiest in their 60s, 70s, and 80s, but unlike many people, I do live with some regrets surrounding my 20s, and would like a bit more time in Youngeville. Doubt I can make up for it all, life is what it has become in many ways, grass is greener and so on, but yeah... Wish I could be as content as some of the commenters here.
I think part of what the author was saying (though he sure found a dark way of saying it) is that, past a certain age, it's okay not to panic.
Update: Changed wording once I realized you weren't disagreeing with me.
Update: Changed wording once I realized you weren't disagreeing with me.
> but unlike many people, I do live with some regrets surrounding my 20s.
What people are you talking to that don't have regrets from that age? Accumulating regret is a part of life. I wish that I had been more patient with others, spent more time with my brother, kissed that girl I met in Berlin, not worried so much about what others thought...the list is endless, and I'm still in my late twenties.
What people are you talking to that don't have regrets from that age? Accumulating regret is a part of life. I wish that I had been more patient with others, spent more time with my brother, kissed that girl I met in Berlin, not worried so much about what others thought...the list is endless, and I'm still in my late twenties.
I'm under 40 and have sort of felt some of what is in the article for a really long time.
Maybe I can look forward to enjoying it more after 40.
Maybe I can look forward to enjoying it more after 40.
Mid thirties here - I assumed it was meant to be intentionally funny, and found it about cute and thought-provoking in equal measure.
This article is honestly not the worst way a midlife crisis can express itself.
"People between 40 and Ω (an indeterminate number defined as “really, just way too old”), are primarily employed as meaning-makers for the under-40 set. This is because they are mostly good for nothing else, and on average not valuable enough themselves for society to invest meaning in."
Deliciously dark.
Deliciously dark.
Seems like he's over 40 and is inventing another meaning game. No thanks.
I don't believe in the concept of a "meaning game". It's not a game.
There really is very little to understanding life's meaning, regardless of age, despite all the philosophers and theologians still trying to figure out the details. It comes down to this:
Life is first and foremost about loving everything and everyone. I don't mean that you have to be happy, but if you show your love through your actions, and they are not selfish, but you still take care of yourself, then you will have done all that you can. If you've not been given the ability to interact with the outside world, that's ok too- you just do the best that you can.
If you have been given the ability to do something that is better than your other abilities, you should try hard to use that if it shows your love. Your love may be playing triangle in a death metal band, and that's ok. You may not always have that ability, and if more people did what they did best for the benefit of their craft and others, the world could be much more interesting. You often don't have to quit your job to do it, though quitting is fine also.
If you get to the point where you become less able to do something, don't dwell on that. Just do the best you can do with what you have. You might fail, miserably. It's not a guarantee of success, but if you do your best and keep doing your best, then you'll have few regrets. You may have wasted many years- it doesn't matter. You may do incredible things through small interactions with people that no one may ever learn of, because all of us see only a small fraction of what's really going on. Whatever you do, just don't give up.
There really is very little to understanding life's meaning, regardless of age, despite all the philosophers and theologians still trying to figure out the details. It comes down to this:
Life is first and foremost about loving everything and everyone. I don't mean that you have to be happy, but if you show your love through your actions, and they are not selfish, but you still take care of yourself, then you will have done all that you can. If you've not been given the ability to interact with the outside world, that's ok too- you just do the best that you can.
If you have been given the ability to do something that is better than your other abilities, you should try hard to use that if it shows your love. Your love may be playing triangle in a death metal band, and that's ok. You may not always have that ability, and if more people did what they did best for the benefit of their craft and others, the world could be much more interesting. You often don't have to quit your job to do it, though quitting is fine also.
If you get to the point where you become less able to do something, don't dwell on that. Just do the best you can do with what you have. You might fail, miserably. It's not a guarantee of success, but if you do your best and keep doing your best, then you'll have few regrets. You may have wasted many years- it doesn't matter. You may do incredible things through small interactions with people that no one may ever learn of, because all of us see only a small fraction of what's really going on. Whatever you do, just don't give up.
> Life is first and foremost about loving everything and everyone.
For you. The real truth is life has no meaning other than the ones we each assign ourselves; meaning is entirely subjective and as such there is no one answer, there's billions of answers.
For you. The real truth is life has no meaning other than the ones we each assign ourselves; meaning is entirely subjective and as such there is no one answer, there's billions of answers.
A life without direction is like a car careening down the highway without anyone driving. Sure, you could do it, but it can be dangerous to yourselves and others. I've personally been affected by people that have lost direction, and affected others negatively whenever I've been without direction.
For those seeking a reason to why we exist, there is no better reason than to love. Trying to get us off of the planet and explore the universe is love. Taking care of the homeless and hungry is love. Saving some animal species is love. Having dinner with a neighbor and listening to them tell their stories is love. Doing your best at your job to help others grow is love. Calling a family member or friend to see how they are doing is love.
Personally, I believe in loving others and loving my God and trying to do the best I can with what I have. That's my meaning and that's the real truth for me, and it could be for a number of people.
For those seeking a reason to why we exist, there is no better reason than to love. Trying to get us off of the planet and explore the universe is love. Taking care of the homeless and hungry is love. Saving some animal species is love. Having dinner with a neighbor and listening to them tell their stories is love. Doing your best at your job to help others grow is love. Calling a family member or friend to see how they are doing is love.
Personally, I believe in loving others and loving my God and trying to do the best I can with what I have. That's my meaning and that's the real truth for me, and it could be for a number of people.
> For those seeking a reason to why we exist, there is no better reason than to love.
Again, for YOU. Don't project your desires and need for purpose onto others and presume we're all like you. YOU think there is no better reason than love, that doesn't make it true for everyone. YOU have a need to understand why, some of us have no such need because we recognize the question is invalid, there is no WHY because that presumes purpose which doesn't exist objectively, only subjectively. The meaning is always subjective, your reasons are not my reasons and you're speaking as if it is, as if all people need such things and that's simply not the case.
My point is, don't tell people what the meaning of life is because you're going to be wrong; that's YOUR meaning for YOUR life and that's it.
Again, for YOU. Don't project your desires and need for purpose onto others and presume we're all like you. YOU think there is no better reason than love, that doesn't make it true for everyone. YOU have a need to understand why, some of us have no such need because we recognize the question is invalid, there is no WHY because that presumes purpose which doesn't exist objectively, only subjectively. The meaning is always subjective, your reasons are not my reasons and you're speaking as if it is, as if all people need such things and that's simply not the case.
My point is, don't tell people what the meaning of life is because you're going to be wrong; that's YOUR meaning for YOUR life and that's it.
I didn't interpret it as another meaning game, but rather the same same meaning game but being played from the other side this time.
To provide a concrete example: on one hand there is the motivated engineer willing to do the best she can, ultimately, for the profits of her employer (this is her playing the meaning-game by fulfilling her desires) ... and on the other hand there is the manager of that engineer whose job essentially is to keep her motivated so that she remains productive (this is him playing the meaning-game of creating/ maintaining desires).
That concrete example can be extended to many other memes of culture.
To provide a concrete example: on one hand there is the motivated engineer willing to do the best she can, ultimately, for the profits of her employer (this is her playing the meaning-game by fulfilling her desires) ... and on the other hand there is the manager of that engineer whose job essentially is to keep her motivated so that she remains productive (this is him playing the meaning-game of creating/ maintaining desires).
That concrete example can be extended to many other memes of culture.
[deleted]
This is not true, especially in our industry. Considering how many start-up owners are under 40 and employ many people.
The article's starting-point is spot on- you'll find very little of culture is aimed at people above an age category loosely defined as "youth." This is not only a matter of marketing or ageist tropes, its built into the very way we think about storytelling- characters are designed as stand-ins for the reader, or as role models, or as representations of forces in the world, all capitalizing on a reader trying to define their sense of self, their future, and their place in things. Where are stories for people who have solidified their ideas about these matters? What would these stories look like? We have no idea- few or no artists have been brave and inventive enough to go there.
A cynical part of me (though it cannot match the article's author's cynicism, in the slightest) speculates that the reason culture is geared towards the under-40 crowd is simply that people above that age have usually had children, and therefore don't really do much worth telling stories about- and, further, are focused on individuals below 40 rather than themselves. Perhaps we'll reach the point that we've raised the concept of youth to such a height that people will forego even childrearing to hang on to it, and then we'll have some culture for these emancipated older crowds. It would be nice, I think.
A cynical part of me (though it cannot match the article's author's cynicism, in the slightest) speculates that the reason culture is geared towards the under-40 crowd is simply that people above that age have usually had children, and therefore don't really do much worth telling stories about- and, further, are focused on individuals below 40 rather than themselves. Perhaps we'll reach the point that we've raised the concept of youth to such a height that people will forego even childrearing to hang on to it, and then we'll have some culture for these emancipated older crowds. It would be nice, I think.
A cynical part of me (though it cannot match the article's author's cynicism, in the slightest) speculates that the reason culture is geared towards the under-40 crowd is simply that people above that age have usually had children, and therefore don't really do much worth telling stories about- and, further, are focused on individuals below 40 rather than themselves.
You're not cynical enough. The reason culture is geared toward those at the earlier end of a life's average parenting period is that they have more disposable income and they aren't as experienced in spending it. People in their 40s (or, should I say, with a certain level of life experience) are not as susceptible to advertising, both because they have kids and mortages and therefore disposable income is a lot more locked down, and because they often see the advertising coming from a mile away.
Money and manipulation, the one-two punch of commercial fascination.
You're not cynical enough. The reason culture is geared toward those at the earlier end of a life's average parenting period is that they have more disposable income and they aren't as experienced in spending it. People in their 40s (or, should I say, with a certain level of life experience) are not as susceptible to advertising, both because they have kids and mortages and therefore disposable income is a lot more locked down, and because they often see the advertising coming from a mile away.
Money and manipulation, the one-two punch of commercial fascination.
"I'm just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round" from Watching the Wheels[1] -- John Lennon at 40. He also says he is now "No longer riding on the Merry-Go-Round". Maybe 40 is when you actually become you, just watching it spin while you be you. Just do what you want at 40, if you don't you haven't reached escape velocity from the show.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIB2nkUfeWw
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIB2nkUfeWw
You're telling me that all I need to do to build the institution of my dreams is provide people with a sense of meaning!? LOL.
I do the things I do because I like them and others find at least some of them valuable, and there's probably a significant chunk of biological determination behind my enjoyment of those things. And that biological determination is enough intrinsic value in my "meaning games" to satisfy my existential angst. I went on this whole meaning search in my early 20s which I'm just completing and came to similar conclusions, but apparently on a lighter note after going through my Debbie Downer bouts.
(1) Sunlight and exercise. (2) Friends and good conversation. (3) Women. (4) Pursuit of goals. (5) Altruism.
Rinse and repeat. Good enough for me. When I'm feeling down, it can be at least partially attributed to not checking one of the above boxes.
I do the things I do because I like them and others find at least some of them valuable, and there's probably a significant chunk of biological determination behind my enjoyment of those things. And that biological determination is enough intrinsic value in my "meaning games" to satisfy my existential angst. I went on this whole meaning search in my early 20s which I'm just completing and came to similar conclusions, but apparently on a lighter note after going through my Debbie Downer bouts.
(1) Sunlight and exercise. (2) Friends and good conversation. (3) Women. (4) Pursuit of goals. (5) Altruism.
Rinse and repeat. Good enough for me. When I'm feeling down, it can be at least partially attributed to not checking one of the above boxes.
> You're telling me that all I need to do to build the institution of my dreams is provide people with a sense of meaning!? LOL.
http://gapingvoid.com/blog/2004/06/27/the-hughtrain/
http://gapingvoid.com/blog/2004/06/27/the-hughtrain/
>You're telling me that all I need to do to build the institution of my dreams is provide people with a sense of meaning!? LOL.
You think that's easy? LOL.
You think that's easy? LOL.
Hm... I never bothered with altruism. Is it really worth it?
Yes, altruism balances egocentrism.
I enjoy people. I started at one of the lower rungs of society and have been able to do well for myself through a lucky concoction of genes, being born in the USA, and having the body of human knowledge at my fingertips. Not everyone is so lucky, and I imagine if I ever come into some serious money that I'll be using it to level the playing field for others. The effective altruism movement intrigues me as well.
You should add your current age to this as a data point
I've never come across anything that was so effective at being depressing that I felt weighed down just from skimming it.
This:
Being 41, my answer is to engage younger folks in search of naive energy and older folks in search for stories of experiences. I've found optimism in both.
No, you begin to experience immortality the first time
you recognize the transience of experiences you thought
were permanent, and more subtly, the permanence of
experiences you hoped were transient.
Being 41, my answer is to engage younger folks in search of naive energy and older folks in search for stories of experiences. I've found optimism in both.
Does anyone feel like taking a stab at explaining in non-poetic form what he means by "meaning games"?
My interpretation is that he's basically calling out all of society as a kind of consumerism.
The > 40 folks spend most of their time crafting the illusion of a pursuit of meaning ("Hey, why don't you try my product or my religion or my self-help book or my investment plan or why don't you sit down and listen to what I have to say?") The < 40 folks spend most of their time experimenting with or purchasing or rejecting all the ideas/products that the > 40 folks create.
The author calls them "meaning games" because he asserts that meaning is not universal truth but more of a cultural trend. So it's a game because you never actually achieve meaning. You just play the game and constantly think you're about to achieve meaning. That creates a kind of enthalpy that perpetuates society.
The > 40 folks spend most of their time crafting the illusion of a pursuit of meaning ("Hey, why don't you try my product or my religion or my self-help book or my investment plan or why don't you sit down and listen to what I have to say?") The < 40 folks spend most of their time experimenting with or purchasing or rejecting all the ideas/products that the > 40 folks create.
The author calls them "meaning games" because he asserts that meaning is not universal truth but more of a cultural trend. So it's a game because you never actually achieve meaning. You just play the game and constantly think you're about to achieve meaning. That creates a kind of enthalpy that perpetuates society.
Thank you for your extremely clear, to-the-point tl;dr
I think the reference to consumerism leads ones understanding astray. It's is not particularly more apropos to consumerism then any other context of meaning. Religion, self image, ambition, love life, are all equally relevant here.
Your last paragraph captures it best, and his assertion does not seem to have any obvious contradictions in reality.
Your last paragraph captures it best, and his assertion does not seem to have any obvious contradictions in reality.
I'd like to belatedly thank you for this lucid explanation :)
Books, religion, university research, fashion trends and charities. Wars, lynch mobs, cartoons, traditions, village fetes, school plays, professional plays, business strategies and restaurant reviews. Newspapers, television stations, YCombinator, football teams and new political parties. Anything to which a multitude of younger, stupider people can claim allegiance for which to be nice or mean to their peers.
This. Chris Hedges has a whole book about this called War Is A Force that Gives Us Meaning.
It's shouldn't be that difficult to understand, considering we spend all day every day interacting with these institutions, so it's disappointing to see so many otherwise intelligent people here who don't seem to grok what he's talking about.
It's shouldn't be that difficult to understand, considering we spend all day every day interacting with these institutions, so it's disappointing to see so many otherwise intelligent people here who don't seem to grok what he's talking about.
In the positive: whatever captures the mind and imagination, anything that makes you say "this is the future!".
In the negative: whatever outrages and makes you say "this must change for us to move forward!".
Basically anything that charges you with emotion that feels "big".
I think the author would agree that Elon Musk, Donald Trump and Steve Jobs are some of the biggest recent makers of meaning games.
In the negative: whatever outrages and makes you say "this must change for us to move forward!".
Basically anything that charges you with emotion that feels "big".
I think the author would agree that Elon Musk, Donald Trump and Steve Jobs are some of the biggest recent makers of meaning games.
I see it as an reference to Wittgenstein's analogy of language games. [1] That was a concept designed to show that words do not intrinsically have meaning or refer to the world, as many philosophers claimed. Rather, language gets meaning in the context of the actions of its usage with others, much like the rules and actions in a game. The interpretation for a meaning game would be that life does not have intrinsic meaning, but we create or find constructs between ourselves and other people from which we can derive a contextual meaning. These meaning games then give us a purpose we can involve ourselves in. By constructing these games for others, say a parent creating a game of success in schooling for their child, we can give them contextual meaning and purpose.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language-game_(philosophy)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language-game_(philosophy)
Things people quote on pictures of stock photography as Snapchat memes
A game is something one plays to entertain themselves. It typically involves goals and a framework for understanding progress.
'Tricking' people into playing games could provide structure to their lives, and/or orient their potential towards something constructive for society.
'Tricking' people into playing games could provide structure to their lives, and/or orient their potential towards something constructive for society.
TED talks are a great example.
stuff that I can imagine would be unbearable to read with an "everything is possible" 20 year old mind, but actually quite helpful when you're 35, nearing your wits end and the exit moves closer than the entrance.
tldr
" Almost all culture, old or new, is designed for consumption by people under 40"
== people over 40 are free pressures of culture == immortality
Rest of the article is filled with smart sounding incoherent fluff like this
> culture is built around the game of a meaningful search for eternal truths, timeless values and changeless habits of prowess.
No. culture is built to improve biological fitness of the population.
This seems to be written by someone who harbored strange and misguided misconceptions about life, truth, reality and culture and is now realizing all that he believed in has no value at all.
" Almost all culture, old or new, is designed for consumption by people under 40"
== people over 40 are free pressures of culture == immortality
Rest of the article is filled with smart sounding incoherent fluff like this
> culture is built around the game of a meaningful search for eternal truths, timeless values and changeless habits of prowess.
No. culture is built to improve biological fitness of the population.
This seems to be written by someone who harbored strange and misguided misconceptions about life, truth, reality and culture and is now realizing all that he believed in has no value at all.
At the risk of sounding pedantic:
If the statement "culture is built around the game of a meaningful search for eternal truths, timeless values and changeless habits of prowess" is incoherent, how are you able to give a definitive, confident reply?
To paraphrase Wittgenstein, something incoherent can't be either true or false. Personally, I find both of your perspectives on what culture is built around to be interesting but vague.
If the statement "culture is built around the game of a meaningful search for eternal truths, timeless values and changeless habits of prowess" is incoherent, how are you able to give a definitive, confident reply?
To paraphrase Wittgenstein, something incoherent can't be either true or false. Personally, I find both of your perspectives on what culture is built around to be interesting but vague.
Truth is a pathless land[1], but that doesn't stop us from forming our own truths.
I think my truth is superior because,
Its based on observed reality, eg: cultural taboo's against incest
Has practical applications in the form Evolutionary psychology.
Is internally consistent.
Most importantly doesn't take grim view of culture as something that we are slaves to, something that can chew us and spit us out after it has no use for us, something separate from me. The stance that author seems to have taken.
1 - blanking on where I got that from.
I think my truth is superior because,
Its based on observed reality, eg: cultural taboo's against incest
Has practical applications in the form Evolutionary psychology.
Is internally consistent.
Most importantly doesn't take grim view of culture as something that we are slaves to, something that can chew us and spit us out after it has no use for us, something separate from me. The stance that author seems to have taken.
1 - blanking on where I got that from.
Krishnamurti
> No. culture is built to improve biological fitness of the population.
> This seems to be written by someone who harbored strange and misguided misconceptions about life, truth, reality and culture
This seems to be written by someone who harbors strange and misguided misconceptions about life, truth, reality and culture.
> This seems to be written by someone who harbored strange and misguided misconceptions about life, truth, reality and culture
This seems to be written by someone who harbors strange and misguided misconceptions about life, truth, reality and culture.
> No. culture is built to improve biological fitness of the population.
Are we really sure about that? What about https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisherian_runaway
Are we really sure about that? What about https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisherian_runaway
I think his point is that everyone harbors strange and misguided misconceptions about life, truth, reality, and culture. Here's his.
I think THE point is that everyone harbors strange and misguided misconceptions about life, truth, reality, and culture. But after a certain age, a mature consciousness no longer is so arrogant as to imagine it can tell others why they're misguided. But that's a thread killer--just couldn't resist.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhicitta [2] http://youtu.be/LGdyVnW86SY
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhicitta [2] http://youtu.be/LGdyVnW86SY
I'm with you on this one. I feel my time would be better spent watching Glenn Beck mash his face into a plate of Cheetos (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/glenn-beck-cheetos-vid...) than reading this ridiculous analysis of demographics.
The whole thing was insultingly naive when making statements, and completely without any foundation when trying to make bold claims.
The whole thing was insultingly naive when making statements, and completely without any foundation when trying to make bold claims.
Both definitions for culture are perfectly compatible.
An excellent example of playing the game he sought to escape.
Isn't it all, from religion to the vague algebra in TFA, just a riff on the only real question?
...not that I'm above it, either. As a 35-give-or-take person, existential angst is hitting me more and more frequently. Just seems to be the way things are.
Isn't it all, from religion to the vague algebra in TFA, just a riff on the only real question?
...not that I'm above it, either. As a 35-give-or-take person, existential angst is hitting me more and more frequently. Just seems to be the way things are.
It's not all culture, but US culture, that is designed for people under 40. (Actually, for people under 30, but it usually takes until 40 to notice it.)
Almost all culture is, or is getting fast, to be US culture, so that's little consolation.
>The grim truth is not that there is no profoundly satisfying answer. The grim truth is that there is no overwhelming question.
You don't have time to philosophize if your house is burning. If you zoom out and speed up time, humans are burning the Earth. So the overwhelming question is this: can we stop ourselves. A related question is this: can we spread life beyond Earth?
When humans are spread throughout the solar system and under the oceans and (hopefully) around other solar systems, then let us kick our feet up and ask these questions (or rather, our descendants). It is a bad decision to entertain this kind of nihilism - and although I think it's unlikely any nihilist will have an "aha!" moment reading my words, but it's worth a shot.
You don't have time to philosophize if your house is burning. If you zoom out and speed up time, humans are burning the Earth. So the overwhelming question is this: can we stop ourselves. A related question is this: can we spread life beyond Earth?
When humans are spread throughout the solar system and under the oceans and (hopefully) around other solar systems, then let us kick our feet up and ask these questions (or rather, our descendants). It is a bad decision to entertain this kind of nihilism - and although I think it's unlikely any nihilist will have an "aha!" moment reading my words, but it's worth a shot.
I'm 45.
I spent most of my life learning to draw and tell stories.
My current project is a TV cartoon pitch. In my wildest dreams, it is the seed for a long-running SF franchise like Star Trek or Star Wars, that will affect and inspire people in ways I can't even begin to imagine. In less wild dreams, where it simply makes it to the screen for a season or three without me having to compromise the values I'm slipping into it, and it slides a bunch of my liberal humanist queer values under the radar of a bunch of kids who just want some cool space adventure.
So yeah. I'm hunting for a certain kind of immortality here.
I spent most of my life learning to draw and tell stories.
My current project is a TV cartoon pitch. In my wildest dreams, it is the seed for a long-running SF franchise like Star Trek or Star Wars, that will affect and inspire people in ways I can't even begin to imagine. In less wild dreams, where it simply makes it to the screen for a season or three without me having to compromise the values I'm slipping into it, and it slides a bunch of my liberal humanist queer values under the radar of a bunch of kids who just want some cool space adventure.
So yeah. I'm hunting for a certain kind of immortality here.
Loved it. As someone approaching 40, it was a mind bender that resonated.
Would you mind maybe saying what exactly that you loved ; perhaps in normal language.
I liked the idea of life being broken up into chunks.
That 40 is a real delineator, which is what it feels like to me (though ask me in five years, and I may feel different).
That the focus of the elders is to provide places/ways for the young to find meaning.
That you can really screw up your life by trying to be/act like a phase different than your age.
Nothing truly relevatory, but just a nice, quirky way of delivering these concepts.
Hope this helps.
That 40 is a real delineator, which is what it feels like to me (though ask me in five years, and I may feel different).
That the focus of the elders is to provide places/ways for the young to find meaning.
That you can really screw up your life by trying to be/act like a phase different than your age.
Nothing truly relevatory, but just a nice, quirky way of delivering these concepts.
Hope this helps.
The mild nihilism and the feeling that you're coming up to an age when the world is no longer all that interested in you.
That's not to sound dark and gloomy - quite the opposite - and I think that's what many of the younger crowd are missing here.
If you're over 40 and you want the world to pay attention, you need to offer some greater truth to the under 40s crowd.
I think the core idea that's resonating is that around 40 you're slowly starting to drift up out of the fray, and having previously been an the center of the universe, that's an interesting feeling.
That's not to sound dark and gloomy - quite the opposite - and I think that's what many of the younger crowd are missing here.
If you're over 40 and you want the world to pay attention, you need to offer some greater truth to the under 40s crowd.
I think the core idea that's resonating is that around 40 you're slowly starting to drift up out of the fray, and having previously been an the center of the universe, that's an interesting feeling.
The author lost me at "The only culture designed for people between 40 and Ω is prescription drug ads and unreadably dense literary novels."
If anything I think things seen by younger people as "unreadably dense" often unfold once you become older and have life-experience.
If at 40 you haven't found a single piece of music, literature, film, or art created in the twentieth century which has depth and value to you, then you haven't really tried.
If anything I think things seen by younger people as "unreadably dense" often unfold once you become older and have life-experience.
If at 40 you haven't found a single piece of music, literature, film, or art created in the twentieth century which has depth and value to you, then you haven't really tried.
[deleted]
Making judgments about people based on their age is as immature as this article. It is a tragic generalization of humans probably designed to make the author feel better about getting older. If it took you till 40 to realize everything is bullshit then I feel sorry for you. If you think that getting really old is when you finally get to rest then you're a real moron. You should be happy now. If you're putting it off or you think there is something that you just haven't quite learned yet that is going to make some difference then someone gave you some bad information. Remember when you were a teenager and you thought you knew everything? Guess what? You did. There are only 2 states of being: Confidence and Not Confidence. You choose it. I hope the author reads this and pulls his head out of his ass.
As the pace of innovation in healthcare continues to increase exponentially, 40 will be the new 30 and eventually the new 20. People who are 40 now might live to 120. Am I being too optimistic? Probably. But I wouldn't be surprised if a whole lot of us live a LOT longer than our grandparents did.
What will be age of retirement in the future is an interesting question. I'm not sure I want to live to 120 if it means I cannot reasonably retire until I'm 95.
I'm not sure I want to live to 120 if it means I cannot reasonably retire until I'm 95.
So working is literally worse than death?
So working is literally worse than death?
No, not at the moment, but 60 something years from now it probably will be; that's a lot of time to spend making bits flip so some man or woman I'll likely never meet can be advertised to in some new innovative disruptive way (or whatever mundane/evil task your industry is involved in).
It takes 5-10 years of work to retire.
http://www.amazon.com/Early-Retirement-Extreme-Philosophical...
http://earlyretirementextreme.com/
http://www.amazon.com/Early-Retirement-Extreme-Philosophical...
http://earlyretirementextreme.com/
Sure if you want to live your life like a robot for five years then it's totally doable. That approach takes extreme discipline which most people do not have. Also kids throw a wrench into that strategy.
It's actually quite possible that AI and machine's will replace a lot jobs by then and there'll be a basic income guarantee for all. See https://blog.ycombinator.com/basic-income
I sincerely hope that's how such a future would pan out.
I'm a little mystified when people say this since it seems to me that access to healthcare is only getting harder. Many routine health services are already prohibitively expensive for many people to purchase. What makes people think that anti-aging therapy would be within the reach of the average person?
I'm 35 and I thought this article was spot on, it sounds a bit nihilist the way he puts it, but the great upside of this view is that you can pretty much ignore culture whenever you feel like it. It is after all just the byproduct of all those meaning games.
I don't think culture is produced only for under 40s, a lot of it targets families, frightened grannies, and so on. He's right that people tend to fade out of the public eye as they get older--everyone stops giving a shit about you unless they have a specific reason to.
I didn't understand the snarky/cynical undertone. When you're young you think a lot of dumb stuff matters. You eventually realize it doesn't and start to chill out a bit. Thank god for that, it feels good!
I don't think culture is produced only for under 40s, a lot of it targets families, frightened grannies, and so on. He's right that people tend to fade out of the public eye as they get older--everyone stops giving a shit about you unless they have a specific reason to.
I didn't understand the snarky/cynical undertone. When you're young you think a lot of dumb stuff matters. You eventually realize it doesn't and start to chill out a bit. Thank god for that, it feels good!
Actually TV shows and movies are made for the young, the under 40 people. When they reboot a movie or comic book it is for the younger generation not the older that grew up with it.
Immortality comes with a cost like losing teeth, gray hair, wrinkles, you don't look as good as when you were younger. You might need plastic surgery, hair dye, or even Sens if it is available to prevent aging.
Businesses want to hire recent college graduates and not 40 or older people because 20 somethings are strong enough to work extra hours, don't get married and have kids yet, and can work for less money.
Immortality comes with a cost like losing teeth, gray hair, wrinkles, you don't look as good as when you were younger. You might need plastic surgery, hair dye, or even Sens if it is available to prevent aging.
Businesses want to hire recent college graduates and not 40 or older people because 20 somethings are strong enough to work extra hours, don't get married and have kids yet, and can work for less money.
This guy is an interesting case of a gifted person gone wrong.
He gets to 'I think I'm full of shit', but then bounces right back into explaining the universe in the most convoluted, wrong, pretentious way.
There is no magic at 40, it is simply that most people have kids by the time they're 40, and their interests are in seeing their kids succeed - not much else.
So there's not much left to sell to someone who's 40+ - except better health, as the author correctly points out.
As for immortality etc - just a bunch of pompous nonsense.
He gets to 'I think I'm full of shit', but then bounces right back into explaining the universe in the most convoluted, wrong, pretentious way.
There is no magic at 40, it is simply that most people have kids by the time they're 40, and their interests are in seeing their kids succeed - not much else.
So there's not much left to sell to someone who's 40+ - except better health, as the author correctly points out.
As for immortality etc - just a bunch of pompous nonsense.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
> Creating new meaning means disturbing the universe. By sciencing the shit out of it, as we have discussed several times before.
This text is utterly self-indulgent bullshit.
> When you’re ready to play god for your own amusement.
What did this guy smoke
... and why is this in the top 50% of HN?
This text is utterly self-indulgent bullshit.
> When you’re ready to play god for your own amusement.
What did this guy smoke
... and why is this in the top 50% of HN?
Winning before making. This is survival.
Making before beauty. This is perpetuation.
Beauty before virtue. This is leadership.
Virtue before truth. This is realism.
Therefore when Tao is lost, there is goodness.
When goodness is lost, there is kindness.
When kindness is lost, there is justice.
When justice is lost, there is ritual.
Now ritual is the husk of faith and loyalty,
the beginning of confusion.
Knowledge of the future is only a
flowery trapping of the Tao.
It is the beginning of folly.
Therefore the truly great man dwells on what is real
and not what is on the surface,
On the fruit and not the flower,
Therefore accept the one and reject the other.
To make your creations endure,
so they don’t go away when you stop
believing in them, you may need to do beautiful,
vicious, and false things.
His sense of value is from the attention society gives him before he is 40, and when that attention runs out, from the money society gives him after 40:
you have enough value that society does culture to you
You might conclude from this that if you seek meaning, you will also make money. This is exactly wrong. You have to make meaning games, which is exactly the opposite sort of activity.
He thinks because there's no permanence in this world, nothing is of meaning, and therefore he should invest in creating and consuming imageries, because only then will society gives him value:
You’ve seen too many business cycles, too many political cycles, too many cultural cycles, too many saints and sinners trading places, to believe that this time a source of meaning will endure.
But he doesn't realise, it's because everything is transient, everything is always transforming from one to another, everything is of value. He doesn't realise, economic booms and recession are two sides of the same coin - one creates the other. He doesn't realise for every winner, there is a loser. For every saint, there's a sinner[2]. He doesn't realise, it's all the same thing, changing into one and then another. This is the universe, making itself, and everything is part of that process. And that, is truth.
[1] http://www.wussu.com/laotzu/laotzu38.html
[2] If there were only saints, would there be saints?
"Wisdom is what's left after we've run out of personal opinions."
~Cullen Hightower
This was obviously written by an insecure 40 year old. Let's tar and feather him.
>Almost all culture, old or new, is designed for consumption by people under 40.
I wonder how you would even do that? I mean if I'm writing a book or a movie or such how can I design it to be consumed by 35 year old but not 45 year olds given their behaviour is much the same? There must be some trick I'm missing.
I wonder how you would even do that? I mean if I'm writing a book or a movie or such how can I design it to be consumed by 35 year old but not 45 year olds given their behaviour is much the same? There must be some trick I'm missing.
The trick is not taking a statement at 100% face value.
He even says "ALMOST ALL". Most records, most movies, most books, most magazines, etc are for people under 40.
>how can I design it to be consumed by 35 year old but not 45 year olds given their behaviour is much the same
Again, taking it too literally. You picked two nearby points (+- 5 years) for your question as if they present a binary, whereas it's more a continuum. A movie made for 35 year olds will be consumed OK by someone at 40, less ok by someone at 45, much less by someone at 50, etc.
And that's a film made for 35 year olds -- most films are targeted at even younger people, and modern Hollywood does most of its blockbusters to sub-20 -- which is evident even in the ages of the stars (given that stars are typically 10-15 years older than the target audience). That's not even some dark secret, it's common ad demographics.
He even says "ALMOST ALL". Most records, most movies, most books, most magazines, etc are for people under 40.
>how can I design it to be consumed by 35 year old but not 45 year olds given their behaviour is much the same
Again, taking it too literally. You picked two nearby points (+- 5 years) for your question as if they present a binary, whereas it's more a continuum. A movie made for 35 year olds will be consumed OK by someone at 40, less ok by someone at 45, much less by someone at 50, etc.
And that's a film made for 35 year olds -- most films are targeted at even younger people, and modern Hollywood does most of its blockbusters to sub-20 -- which is evident even in the ages of the stars (given that stars are typically 10-15 years older than the target audience). That's not even some dark secret, it's common ad demographics.
It was kind of an illustration that it didn't make sense. I mean I can understand targeting teenagers vs adults but as a 52 year old I watch / read much the same stuff that I did as a 25 year old. I think the whole thing that they are targeting under 40s rather than 'adults' is kinda bollocks.
>It was kind of an illustration that it didn't make sense. I mean I can understand targeting teenagers vs adults but as a 52 year old I watch / read much the same stuff that I did as a 25 year old.
Yes, but the difference is, this time it's not made for you. E.g. same way I could still watch the teletubbies -- even enjoy it and look forward to the next episode, it doesn't mean it was made with my demographic in mind.
The idea is most movies will show sub-40 people, sub-40 aspirations, sub-40 plots, sub-40 situations, be based on sub-40 concerns, and sub-40 fashion, etc.
Yes, but the difference is, this time it's not made for you. E.g. same way I could still watch the teletubbies -- even enjoy it and look forward to the next episode, it doesn't mean it was made with my demographic in mind.
The idea is most movies will show sub-40 people, sub-40 aspirations, sub-40 plots, sub-40 situations, be based on sub-40 concerns, and sub-40 fashion, etc.
Though younger actors doesn't necessarily mean they are making it just for a younger audience. Old folks with walking sticks would rather see someone fit play superman than a doddery version.
If it's Superman it's already for a younger audience.
Of course with the infantilization of culture that's difficult for a lot of people to fathom, and it even needs to be masked a little (that's what causes the need to have people like Nolan to instill dime-store "darkness" into superhero movies, which supposedly makes it "deeper", while it's still 10 times as shallow as e.g. "The Searchers").
Of course with the infantilization of culture that's difficult for a lot of people to fathom, and it even needs to be masked a little (that's what causes the need to have people like Nolan to instill dime-store "darkness" into superhero movies, which supposedly makes it "deeper", while it's still 10 times as shallow as e.g. "The Searchers").
> When your own appetite for meaning is satiated, and you are ready to start making meaning games for others. When you’re ready to play god for your own amusement.
So what the author is effectively saying is that at a certain age one jumps (more or less) from being at the receiving end of meaning-games to being at the transmitting end of it. What the author is reluctant to acknowledge is the fact that his (ever more abstractly phrased) "appetitive for meaning" has not ended (via being satiated, for culture-induced meaning by its nature cannot be satiated), but rather has taken on a new form and position (whilst still remaining an appetite).
The author, as of now, is as bound to the cultural shackles as his teenage self. Indeed now he is helping perpetuate the cycle.
So what the author is effectively saying is that at a certain age one jumps (more or less) from being at the receiving end of meaning-games to being at the transmitting end of it. What the author is reluctant to acknowledge is the fact that his (ever more abstractly phrased) "appetitive for meaning" has not ended (via being satiated, for culture-induced meaning by its nature cannot be satiated), but rather has taken on a new form and position (whilst still remaining an appetite).
The author, as of now, is as bound to the cultural shackles as his teenage self. Indeed now he is helping perpetuate the cycle.
Sure beats being a 30something "leftover" woman in China because China.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheng_nu
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheng_nu
Shen-gnu - middle age, left over free software???
What does society think of me? I couldn't give less of a fuck. How about asking what the people around you think of you?