←back to thread

I wrote a book called “Crap Towns”. It seemed funny at the time

(samj.substack.com)
395 points url | 4 comments | 26 Apr 25 00:30 UTC | HN request time: 1.143s | source
Show context
addicted ◴[26 Apr 25 01:43 UTC] No.43800174[source]▶
So it’s not that it won’t be published today.

It just won’t be as popular today. And would, ironically, be crapped on by other people, which is what the author is unhappy about.

Thats what the author means, and represents the entirety of the “Oh I am so oppressed because I can’t say shitty unfunny jokes because other people will make shitty unfunny jokes about me in response” genre of argument.

The difference between then and now is that the people in the “crap towns” have the opportunity to call the author out.

replies(1): >>43800241 #
1. svat ◴[26 Apr 25 01:56 UTC] No.43800241[source]▶
That's not the author's main point — the author's point is the surprising observation that “That joke isn't funny any more”, even to the author himself. This is something deeper than the usual “genre of argument” you're referring to.
replies(1): >>43800318 #
2. relaxing ◴[26 Apr 25 02:13 UTC] No.43800318[source]▶
Eh, he goes out of his way to say

> The good news is that I don’t think that the illiberalism of identity politics will endure much longer. Especially when it comes to the literal policing of humour - and cancellation of comedians for telling the wrong kinds of jokes.

I think it’s still his point.

replies(2): >>43800422 #>>43800506 #
3. brazzy ◴[26 Apr 25 02:35 UTC] No.43800422[source]▶
No; that's at most a sidenote.
4. girvo ◴[26 Apr 25 02:57 UTC] No.43800506[source]▶
If you believe that single sentence (that I disagree with him about, but that's neither here nor their) is the entire point of the article, I'd really suggest you read it again, it's far more interesting than that.