> Am I the only one wondering where the meat of the argument went?
I didn't read an argument so much as just a sneer against professionals who admire scientists and inventors.
But hey, sneering for sneering's sake is sometimes fun. The last paragraph has a little more structure than the essay as a whole, and is mercifully much shorter.
Maybe the best revision wouldn't be repairing the argument so much as reducing the whole thing to a tweet.
> the professional-managerial audience['s] members hear clear, sweet reason when they listen to NPR and think they’re in the presence of something profound when they watch some billionaire give a TED talk. And what this complacent literature purrs into their ears is that creativity is their property, their competitive advantage, their class virtue. Creativity is what they bring to the national economic effort, these books reassure them — and it’s also the benevolent doctrine under which they rightly rule the world.
I didn't read an argument so much as just a sneer against professionals who admire scientists and inventors.
But hey, sneering for sneering's sake is sometimes fun. The last paragraph has a little more structure than the essay as a whole, and is mercifully much shorter.
Maybe the best revision wouldn't be repairing the argument so much as reducing the whole thing to a tweet.
> the professional-managerial audience['s] members hear clear, sweet reason when they listen to NPR and think they’re in the presence of something profound when they watch some billionaire give a TED talk. And what this complacent literature purrs into their ears is that creativity is their property, their competitive advantage, their class virtue. Creativity is what they bring to the national economic effort, these books reassure them — and it’s also the benevolent doctrine under which they rightly rule the world.