March 31, 2019

"The collective outrage over 'American Psycho' provides a context for the essays in 'White,' whose topics range from [Bret Easton] Ellis’s unsupervised 1970s childhood..."

"... in upper-middle-class Sherman Oaks, Calif., to his critiques of movies and movie stars, to President Trump and the digital echo chamber. His points are not always agreeable, but that’s never stopped him. In one essay, 'Liking,' Ellis indicts the 'horrible blooming of "relatability" — the inclusion of everybody into the same mind-set … the ideology that proposes everybody should be on the same page, the better page.'... He’s complained about liberals who think he’s a Trump apologist.... 'Lately what’s bothered me is the tweeting world, and how, since there’s no context, no nuance, and since everyone’s so hysterical, you are tagged things that you are not,' Ellis said. 'The language police is a hard thing to deal with if you are creative.' He really wishes everyone would just calm down...
[He prefers] to treat the news cycle as fleeting entertainment rather than the end of the world ('Really, Jared Kushner looks great in a bathing suit')... Ellis finds himself now in his longest relationship to date, with a 32-year-old musician named Todd Schultz.... He described their post-2016 household as 'a bad sitcom of a crusty old Gen X-er, who’s kind of a lapsed liberal centrist, and my communist gay boyfriend.'... Todd’s a 'political monster' who 'sits in front of MSNBC having meltdown after meltdown … yet his bounce-back time is pretty good.' If Schultz stands for the melodramatic, media-obsessed millennial, then Ellis identifies as 'the old man on the porch,' whining over the cultural profundity of decades past."

From "Bret Easton Ellis Has Calmed Down. He Thinks You Should, Too. In the 1980s and ’90s, the novelist was seen as a literary bad boy and the voice of his generation. Now 55, he’s about to publish his first book in nine years" (NYT).

Here's that book of essays: "White."

Why's it called "White"? Is it racial? The article says that the original title was "White Privileged Male" and that it means to acknowledge the great old book of essays by Joan Didion, "The White Album."

ADDED: The opposition to the idea that "everybody should be on the same page" caught my eye because, just recently, somebody took me to task simply for using the phrase "on the same page" — "We need to be on the same page." He hated that, I was told.

27 comments:

David Begley said...

Twenty-three years younger? Like, what do they have in common other than sex?

JackWayne said...

If you want to know more about Todd.

rhhardin said...

I'm on the same page but read between the lines.

rehajm said...

The guy what wrote American Psycho is now the voice of reason.

Wince said...

...just recently, somebody took me to task simply for using the phrase "on the same page" — "We need to be on the same page."

Wasn't the original phrase "reading from the same page" or "hymnal"?

That "page" phrase implies a certain capitulation to conformity, but of a limited in scope.

That "we all need to be on the same page" is about where we and our minds must exist, as such ultimately totalitarian, and could be construed as an implied threat.

Quayle said...

Being on the same page suggests an equality that some find repugnant. When in our collective thinking we banish the notion of evil principals, evil acts, and the devil who is the unseen advocate for such things independently of each of us, we banish a fixed measure to one’s beliefs, acts, and life. The measure becomes other people - “those guys”. We feel good when the number of “those guys” beneath us becomes larger. Instead of others being fellow travels through life, others become out enemy to be diminished and pushed down, so we can respectively ascend (relatively). The other people around us become and represent the evils and the embodiment of evil (which evil, thankfully for many of us, consequently, can’t be resident in one’s self to any degree, because it is wholly outside one’s self in “those guys”). ‘As long as I am not associated with “those guys” I am good person’, is the thinking. Unity is impossible to such a society possessed with that mindset. Evil isn’t a self existing principle with which we all must grapple. We stop seeking to find and diminish the devilish part of ourselves, as a civic duty. We only seek to separate ourselves from and diminish others - the others who are the devils, “those guys”. Michael Jackson once sang “I’m starting with the man in the mirror.” Today we all want to start with the man in the TV (on the channel watched by “those guys.”).

The existence of evil and good, independent of each person. Free will. Accountability for your use of your free will. The existence of forgiveness and the ability to have your poor choices wiped clean and to start again - to try again - and thereby through trial and error to be able to learn and grow. Remove these principals from your thinking and it is pretty hard to unify a people.

Mid-Life Lawyer said...

Reading that, and although he claims he doesn't care what people think, it seems like he is tamping down his views due to the outrage his being objective about Trump/politics/culture has created among the hysterics at times. It's a shame that he's allowed himself to be censored, after all, but I'll gladly read the book.

Ralph L said...

Elmer Fudd wants everyone on the White Page.

tim maguire said...

If you’re trying to work together, you need to be on the same page. If you’re trying to explore all possibilities, then you don’t want to be on the same page.

If Ellis wants to be largely apolitical, then he can’t date someone who watches MSNBC, even if he does bounce back quick. The sludge will build up. It’s inevitable.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

To me, it seems that "being on the same page" can have two completely different meanings.

The first one, that I prefer, is that people who are discussing things, should have the same facts or information. Being on the same page in the book where you both have equal access to the information that has been presented....so far. Doesn't mean that you have to agree. Just that you both have the same starting point.

The second one, is the idea that to "be on the same page" means that you must be in total agreement with each other or with the one person who is dominant in the discussion. Only one viewpoint prevails because you MUST be "on the same page". In essence: agree with me or get out.

Mary Beth said...

White or pale nimbus white?

wild chicken said...

I had a dream last night that my very liberal cousins were at a table with my very liberal best friend, none of whom I have seen for decades. There was no room for me at the table, and they didn't care to have never there anyway.

Life is easier when you're on the same page.

Crimso said...

All good books have more than one page. So do all bad books.

Fernandinande said...

So, when accounting for the totality of human experience, it is the variety-seekers—not the same-pagers—who are the unusual ones....

The daily rituals of office life are characterized by their monotony and roteness, and being on a different page each day is a sunny, inspired attempt to combat all the repetition. I do genuinely appreciate the optimism of those attempts. But in my mind, being on the same page each day represents a sober reckoning with the fundamental sameness of office life. It seems like an honest admission that life will have some drudgery in it—so accept that and find joy elsewhere instead of forcing a little bit of novelty into a book or magazine and dragging it along on your commute, he freely advised while smirking and wearing a MAGA hat without proper punctuation.

Temujin said...

I wish I could care about Brett Easton Ellis. But I never have and I'm not going to start now. I don't think he's ever read any of my books either. Nor would he care about me or my life.

I think we're all on the same page.

Laslo Spatula said...

If "American Psycho" was written today, the character would not be a Yuppie investment-banker but rather an SJW social-media maven.

Back then, it was expected to hide your anger-management issues and repress your anti-social tendencies.

Now you employ your anti-social tendencies to show your authenticity in tearing the unwoke limb-from-limb on Twitter.

The 'old' American Psycho was considered bad taste because the victims were women.

In the 'new' American Psycho the killer will be venerated because he* kills those that society agrees to hate.

(*or she. Or transgender. Possibilities.)

As the novel in question ends: this is not an exit.

I am Laslo.

Robert Cook said...

@Jack Wayne:

The beginning of the article you linked to:

"When Todd Schultz met Bret Easton Ellis, the aspiring musician and son of legendary animation producer Bill Schultz, was at a party at The Magic Castle in Hollywood, where his ex boyfriend, a film director, was holding a dinner party to try and find Ellis a new boyfriend."

So...I'm confused. Was it Todd Schultz's ex boyfriend who was trying to find Ellis a new boyfriend, or Ellis' ex boyfriend? The sentence is constructed in such a way that the pronoun "his" seems to refer to Todd's ex boyfriend, but why would Todd's ex boyfriend be trying to help Ellis find a new boyfriend? It seems more logical that Ellis's ex would be he one trying to find Ellis a new boyfriend. Perhaps Todd's ex is a friend of Ellis. But none of this is explained.

In short: the writing in the lede is bad.

buwaya said...

In my practice, on an emergency inter-department troubleshooting call (a draining experience at times), in our version of management-speak, to be on the same page means to have been fully briefed on the situation.

I assume the etymology comes from academics, in that all students have read the text to the same point, so that all can proceed from there. This makes sense in our usage.

JaimeRoberto said...

If we aren't all on the same page, how can we have a voice of our generation?

bagoh20 said...

I believe that failure to be on the same page is the basis for the demise of most relationships that fall apart.

Earnest Prole said...

I cannot recommend Bret Easton Ellis’ cultural criticism highly enough. I’ve been listening to his podcasts from a couple years back (the new ones cost money) and he has interesting and brave things to say about everything.

Mid-Life Lawyer said...

Being on the same page to me means (1) that we are in agreement on where we are, what the facts of the issue are etc. as we begin to figure out a solution, and/or (2) we are in agreement on what our policy or mission is toward this issue going forward. In my law practice, for example, I need my claimant (pretty much exclusively representing Social Security Disability claimants at this time) to understand what it is we are trying to establish in order for them to succeed with their claim. Then I need them to be consistent with this agreement when we are in the hearing. My wife, a corporate lawyer, is always having to deal with outside counsel or employees in the field, going off on their own and having to reign them back in and make sure everyone is on the same page on the issues and on what the company's position is on the issues and what the company is trying to accomplish going forward. She spends half her time making sure everyone is on the same page.

daskol said...

Instead of declaiming to his victims the virtues of Phil Collins, who would it be? For some reason, I'm feeling Liz Phair.

Mark O said...

That "same page" stuff comes primarily from orchestral music, where failure to be even in the same measure or key harms everyone. That notion hardly translates to anything else.

Art in LA said...

I'm a late-Boomer, early Gen X-er and read Ellis's "Less Than Zero" and Douglas Coupland's "Generation X" in the mid-80s. I couldn't finish "American Psycho" because it was so dark and violent. For me, the late-70s and early-80s were very happy years but these books foreshadowed the darker, more cynical times ahead. Maybe I was just naive, living in my own little youthful bubble. I'll read "White".

Robert Cook said...

I think "on the same page" means: we all have the same understanding of the matter under discussion. I don't think it necessarily means everyone is in agreement on what to do about the matter under discussion. Or, put another way, what it means in any situation is dependent on the situation.

narciso said...

Right now it would be too obvious:

https://mobile.twitter.com/redsteeze/status/1112379608161308675