nyc
apr 30
2009

You've Got (Hate) Mail

Didn't see this one coming: You've Got (Hate) Mail. Keith Gessen and Emily Gould get the long Vanity Fair dual profile (online only). This graph will determine whether you like this story or not:

At this stage in its evolution, the Web is like an endless novel populated with characters who reveal way too much about themselves, sometimes purposely, sometimes half-knowingly, sometimes unwittingly. It's a junk shop of human emotion and behavior, a forum for advanced people-watching. Day after day as the Gessen-Gould affair unfolded, I turned on my computer and went a-Googling for the latest development. Like any good reality show, it made me sick sometimes, and I tried to tear myself away from it, only to find myself helpless against its crack-like power.
See also: !!!

8 comments

(Or at least I think "web exclusive" means that it won't appear in the magazine. Not sure.)

posted by Rex at 9:38 AM on April 30, 2009

Tate scolds Denton.

Oh, and "didn't see this one coming" is a fib. Krucoff has been talking about this profile for... what feels like since last summer?

posted by Rex at 9:58 AM on April 30, 2009

Seriously though how BORING is the article? Mohney nails it.

posted by katiebakes at 10:37 AM on April 30, 2009

You know why I kinda disagree? Cuz to you (and Caro and Mahoney and me), this is a story already twice-told. But I've sent it to a few people who are only semi-aware of all this stuff.

Then again, you know what their response was? "Who the fuck cares about these people?" So, uh, maybe there's no way to do this right...

Also funny: you know who sent this to me first? Kottke!

posted by Rex at 10:46 AM on April 30, 2009

I guess I'm sounding like one of those people who are like "I don't have to read about it, man, I lived it."

posted by katiebakes at 10:50 AM on April 30, 2009

I like that the writer makes me sound like Batman. But seriously, I don't give a shit about these people, and I'm one of them.

posted by fek at 11:09 AM on April 30, 2009

Are we done talking about this already?

Okay, I'll add something: if there's anything surprising, it's the tone, right? It's quite pro-Emily and pro-Gessen. Good for them! So it needs a foe, and who is it?

I propose, it was Young Manhattanite, right? Aren't they "the bad guy" in this story? (I mean, in the way the story was told. I would never call Krucoff a bad guy. Unless he were sitting next to me.)

posted by Rex at 3:30 PM on April 30, 2009

I agree with Bakes. Funny about the paragraph you pulled - this felt off to me: "Day after day as the Gessen-Gould affair unfolded, I turned on my computer and went a-Googling for the latest development." I hadn't been aware it had been a "thing" like that - that to me describes how Jakob and Julia were covered, but not Emily and Keith. Their relationship felt like a smaller thing in each other's larger stories (each other's larger online stories; that is to say, the narrative about them - I wouldn't presume to know otherwise). And my perception was that they both sort of stopped engaging in it - again, that is an outsider's perception. But Windolf's perception feels wrong to me. Maybe that's what felt off about the article. (But actually disclosure, I didn't finish it.) So maybe I shouldn't be commenting at all. Probably.

posted by Rachel Sklar at 2:14 PM on May 2, 2009




NOTE: The commenting window has expired for this post.