Weird social observations....
I've been getting a lot of reading done on the train to work lately, and I've started picking up on some interesting trends in people's reactions to my reading material. I was on a liberal kick for a little bit right after the election....I felt that I should at least give Audacity of Hope a look, now that the man was going to be our president and all. Most people know what the cover of that book looks like, but for those who don't, it is simply a picture of Obama against a white background. I figured being in Massachusetts and all, that I would not get much of a reaction for reading this book, especially since it was directly after the election and I clearly wasn't making much of a political statement. I was surprised to find however, that I did actually get a number of dirty, quizzical, or otherwise uncomfortable looks from co-riders on the train.
I pondered for quite some time what this could mean. I thought a lot about the AVI's points about liberal social signaling, and was wondering if maybe the looks were a mark of confusion. A person who reads a book by a candidate right before an election is sending a fairly clear message to a party: I want to know about your candidate. A person reading the book right after, someone showing that interest after the fact, well, that's suspicious. I'm leaning towards that as an explanation, because their simply can not be that many angry Republicans on that train. Massachusetts Republicans tend to be pretty rational "blend in to the woodwork" folks. They don't normally have to go searching for fights.
To note, I got no reactions for reading the book "Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein, which was at least 10 times as liberal as "Audacity of Hope". That led me to believe that people really don't hear much about very many books, and that it is the title and cover art that is key in getting reactions on the train.
This then of course meant that I had to grab a nice obviously conservative book with some good cover art to see what happened. David Frum's "Comeback: Conservativism that can win again" fit the bill. There are elephants on the cover. It's red. The title's written in huge Boston Herald special font. I got some weird reactions, and many more quizzical looks. A conservative book by an author that's not Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, or Bill O'Reilly seemed to puzzle people. There were a few angry looks from overtly strange looking people, but lets face it, if I can tell your political affiliation with 95% certainty just by looking at you, you probably don't have many thoughtful opinions anyway.
So I considered my political experiment a wash, as it seems people are weirdly uncomfortable with any overt political material. I dabbled briefly in the idea of going with God themed books, but after one day of reading Christopher Hitchens "God is not Great: How religion poisons everything" I gave that up. If you think people get uncomfortable when you read political books on the train, try religious. I literally had to wrap the cover in paper. Yikes.
In the end, train reading feels very much like small talk at a cocktail party given by people you don't know. The more generic the topic, the better. Daily Metro: good. Book with a potentially alienating title: bad. The only exception to the no religion, politics or sex rule actually seems to be the sex. I am continually surprised to see how many women read romance novels on the train, though I am glad to see that apparently Fabio still has steady work.
I pondered for quite some time what this could mean. I thought a lot about the AVI's points about liberal social signaling, and was wondering if maybe the looks were a mark of confusion. A person who reads a book by a candidate right before an election is sending a fairly clear message to a party: I want to know about your candidate. A person reading the book right after, someone showing that interest after the fact, well, that's suspicious. I'm leaning towards that as an explanation, because their simply can not be that many angry Republicans on that train. Massachusetts Republicans tend to be pretty rational "blend in to the woodwork" folks. They don't normally have to go searching for fights.
To note, I got no reactions for reading the book "Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein, which was at least 10 times as liberal as "Audacity of Hope". That led me to believe that people really don't hear much about very many books, and that it is the title and cover art that is key in getting reactions on the train.
This then of course meant that I had to grab a nice obviously conservative book with some good cover art to see what happened. David Frum's "Comeback: Conservativism that can win again" fit the bill. There are elephants on the cover. It's red. The title's written in huge Boston Herald special font. I got some weird reactions, and many more quizzical looks. A conservative book by an author that's not Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, or Bill O'Reilly seemed to puzzle people. There were a few angry looks from overtly strange looking people, but lets face it, if I can tell your political affiliation with 95% certainty just by looking at you, you probably don't have many thoughtful opinions anyway.
So I considered my political experiment a wash, as it seems people are weirdly uncomfortable with any overt political material. I dabbled briefly in the idea of going with God themed books, but after one day of reading Christopher Hitchens "God is not Great: How religion poisons everything" I gave that up. If you think people get uncomfortable when you read political books on the train, try religious. I literally had to wrap the cover in paper. Yikes.
In the end, train reading feels very much like small talk at a cocktail party given by people you don't know. The more generic the topic, the better. Daily Metro: good. Book with a potentially alienating title: bad. The only exception to the no religion, politics or sex rule actually seems to be the sex. I am continually surprised to see how many women read romance novels on the train, though I am glad to see that apparently Fabio still has steady work.
posted by bs king at 6:02 PM
3 Comments:
Back when I was commuting from Charlestown to West Newton (circa 1979-80), I spent the better part of the one summer reading "Bleak House" by Dickens. I don't remember getting a single reaction. Then again, most of the reading was done on the bus from Downtown Boston to West Newton when I was going against the grain (most were coming into Boston at that time of day). There were just not that many people on the bus. So, I don't have a comparable experience. I have had various titles on my recent plane rides, but the number of people who can actually see what you are reading on a plane is minimal. I guess the moral of the story is to keep a plain, brown book cover handy for when the stares get too intense.
testing
I think what you are seeing is the general lack of knowledge people have. If the title or the picture don't tell them what's up, they aren't sure whether to be offended by you or not.
For extra fun, you can get a highbrow magazine, carefully remove the staples, turn the cover upside down, and refasten.
Post a Comment
<< Home