Another aspect is that the people I consider friends are scattered across the country, whereas in previous eras most of us would likely have stayed in the same town, or at least the same region, for most of our lives. (And I expect this to be more true for people who moved to go to college, then moved again to go to grad school, then moved again for their first post-school job). We're also less likely to stay in the same jobs/companies for most of our careers, so making real friends at work is harder. That means that having friends as an adult, and keeping in regular contact with them, is in fact harder on its own terms than it used to be, even with all the ways I have to contact anyone in the world at any time.
I don't quite fit your description, as I am older, drive for a living 6 or 7 days a week, and I am married. I spend much of my time alone - either driving my car or reading and writing in my office. As an introvert, I find that my alone time is critical. I cannot work well with the distractions of TV, people talking, loud noises from my neighbor's lawn tractor, etc. On the other hand, my wife needs background noise as she does her work. For the most part, TV and movies boor me as they are mainly pushing technologies. That is, you sit there, and the information is sent to you - whereas, with reading, you must concentrate and try to pull out the meaning.
I have noticed that some comments talk about how some people get caught up in the world of Netflix and video games. My liberal friends will blame the medium, but I blame the person. When does personal responsibility come into play? There is nothing inherently wrong with watching TV, but when the "box is consuming your life," it is time to take stock and change your behavior.
As smart as your writing indicates that you are, I can't believe you haven't thought of this. Perhaps TV is just your way of relaxing after a tiring time thinking about your writing. As Daniel Kahneman points out in his book "Thinking, Fast and Slow," thinking about complex matters can be tiring, and this is where habits come in - they help us do things without much thought.
Enjoy your downtime, and please keep writing some fascinating essays.
There's a great book by Doris Lessing, In Pursuit of the English, short and entertaining. It's about how the introduction of TV in 50's/60's Britain ripped up community life. This is an old phenomenon.
With social media, streaming, and videoconferencing, the Internet is turning into a rudimentary version of the Matrix. We can do more and more of our interaction online instead of in the real world.
That said, I'm surprised not to see mention of potential positive aspects of this wave of social change.
Blaise Pascal: "All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone."
Quite a number of different angles to dig into this post...but I'm running late for work (due to stopping to read SB and comment!) and so this is a scattershot rush job reply:
I certainly hope this is more nothing than ado, and especially that it isn't an actual trendline...because for those of us who *do not* get anything out of television, videogames, weed, porn, whatever - there's a real contraction of the "social possibility space". That is, there's lots of nice people I meet all the time, who seem like they'd be mutually fun to befriend. But it's ultimately a similar experience as trying to chat up strangers on the bus or in a coffee shop...you can't, cause there's just an unbroken wall of phones, whose camera eyes stare back lidlessly. And the same happens when it comes to that dreaded question, "so what are you into?" Everyone *else* streams this, games that, watches xyz movies. Even sportsball fans (I don't grok sports) are more refreshing, in many ways - that can still be streamed, but it's much more a communal activity, by design. Sitting home alone watching the Sunday handegg game: that's kind of sad. Having everyone over for a barbecue while watching the Sunday handegg game: that's a real fun time. Even for the people who aren't that much interested in the actual sport. It doesn't really work that way with, like, Netflix...it's awkward to sit and watch a show you don't actually like, just to spend time around another human being.
(I could say that's also by design, that algorithmic recommendations are necessarily tuned to individuals, and thus streaming entertainment intentionally accelerates atomization...but that's a big claim I don't feel confident trying to back up. Maybe in a counterfactual world, streaming would have been explicitly group- or family-oriented, and we'd be in a better place social-fabrically?)
There really is a lot of downtime in life, even with an onerous full-time job and multiple fascinating Substack subscriptions. I gotta do *something* while waiting up until 3AM local time for the latest hot-off-the-press MattY take. When it's very difficult to fill those gaps with other people, and the entertainment on offer is not entertaining...social life becomes dull and colourless indeed.
And I think it's harder than ever to cope with that ennui - one thing I never saw addressed in Robert Putnam's "Bowling Alone" and its kids was the idea of a stimulating expectations gap. That is, when there's an expectation that every waking moment is full of fun and surprise and entertainment, it becomes that much harder to just...be bored, let the mind wander, be struck by chance social encounters. It's something I again notice while riding public transit: not that everyone else is buried in a magic rectangle, but that I'm just...sitting there staring out the window. And that's perfectly 0k. It's a comfortable air-conditioned ride, and SF is a pretty city to look at. So I think part of the draw of modern entertainment is that minds are trained away from being able to expect (let alone tolerate and appreciate) such quiet gaps in life. It's not "escapism" as traditionally defined, it's...I hate using this awkward mental illness analogy, but like stimming for ADHD/autism. Sitting still isn't just a physical act, it's a mental one as well...a mind uncomfortable with being placidly at rest will feel a natural compulsion towards excitement. And why reach for the uncertain, messy, mediocre stimulant of other people when you could get an instant hit off your magic rectangle? Beware Trivial Inconveniences strikes again...
As to the education/risk aversion/marriage thing, I do in fact think there's a lot of meat on those bones, but that's a whole other post I'll maybe flesh out more later. Suffice to say, extended adolescence and safetyism contributes to a growing demographic segment that isn't - or *doesn't feel*, which is maybe even more important - ready for Real Adulting until quite late in life, by historical standards. This runs up against generational cohort effects, plus biological ageing - it's not at all impossible to socialize during educational years, but it does put some serious constraints on what's feasible (even just money-wise, and we know student debt is a major albatross for many trying to aim higher in life).
There's also been continued societal pressure against single and especially unmarried parenthood (not necessarily in terms of norms, but definitely in terms of laws and resources available), the whole "don't have a baby until you're Really Ready" thing. Which is good in many ways! But when one's definition of "ready" gets more and more strict...well, sometimes kids just never happen at all, it's too late. Great entertainment also funges against the other big type of social activity: dating, and relationship creation. It's - not *better* - but *less painful* than ever before to stay single. Hence all those articles bemoaning the youth sex recession, the shitty modern dating market, the declining labor force participation (why work, or work harder, if you're already comfortable; entertainment abundance lowers the floor for what's comfortable)...I dunno, Matt, I really do see it as all connected. It's definitely an idea that can be carried too far - you wrote before about marriage as a conservative poverty cure - and I think some major advocates like Jonathan Haidt's "The Coddling of the American Mind" overstate their case. But it's not a non-existent connection, imo.
I flip though the cable menu to decide what I want to watch. Usually it is something featuring the dulcet tones of David Attenborough. Sometimes an old movie.
The real danger is that James O. Incandenza's final film will be released into the wild by a group of Quebecois separatists. I hear that it's a piece of entertainment so perfect that nobody can stop watching it and we'll all just die in our chairs from lack of food.
So the proposal here is...make sure companies only make mediocre movies? Some would argue we are already there, and "shows are better today" is a value judgment easily argued against in a number of ways. What we do have is a lot MORE, more pandering, and less monoculture.
I agree with the other commenters noting that if Netflix/Marvel/whatever is enough to pull you away from your relationships and life, the problem isn't that Netflix is too good, the problem is your relationships, life, and self. GET A LIFE!
People have been making these types of arguments since the invention of media. Cable television, broadcast television, comic books, radio, novels...probably Greek theatre, if you go back far enough.
In the current moment, I think it is less about the quality or character (or lack thereof) of the entertainment and more about a societal shift focusing on celebrity, and an elevation of discussing fictional universes to something people think is actually interesting and worthwhile. People will argue about Marvel trivia. They won't pay attention to or engage with what's happening right outside their window.
"Have children to fight boredom" is the worst possible conclusion anyone could draw from any of this, with "keep working" being perhaps second worse. Neither of those solve the underlying "get a life" problem, they just distract you from your underlying issues.
Yes, I find it ironic that someone would advise people to have children in order not to be bored. I love my son with all my heart, but caring for an infant full-time is boring as f***. I always knew I didn't want to be a SAHM. (As someone told me, "Taking care of a young child uses up 100% of your energy but only 10% of your brain.")
I took a work transfer to Chicago about 10 years ago. I had two good friends from college there, but one moved soon after and the other had his third kid, so we didn't hang out that often. Also, my job became a mix of remote work and travel, so I had no office life.
Formerly a social person, I instead got way too into streaming, reading, and exercise and basically had no social life for 2.5 years. It was...kinda great. Started dipping into the great foreign shows like Borgen and early Black Mirror and realized that the recommender systems on Amazon and Goodreads can really lead to very satisfying reading if you play them right. Filled in a bunch of movie gaps.
Glad that I left and resumed a social life and eventually started a family, but I am definitely glad it happened. There really is an amazing amount of high quality entertainment at your fingertips.
people should both - have a dog, and cook meals from scratch
do both things and those are huge non-couch time sucks !
Another aspect is that the people I consider friends are scattered across the country, whereas in previous eras most of us would likely have stayed in the same town, or at least the same region, for most of our lives. (And I expect this to be more true for people who moved to go to college, then moved again to go to grad school, then moved again for their first post-school job). We're also less likely to stay in the same jobs/companies for most of our careers, so making real friends at work is harder. That means that having friends as an adult, and keeping in regular contact with them, is in fact harder on its own terms than it used to be, even with all the ways I have to contact anyone in the world at any time.
I don't quite fit your description, as I am older, drive for a living 6 or 7 days a week, and I am married. I spend much of my time alone - either driving my car or reading and writing in my office. As an introvert, I find that my alone time is critical. I cannot work well with the distractions of TV, people talking, loud noises from my neighbor's lawn tractor, etc. On the other hand, my wife needs background noise as she does her work. For the most part, TV and movies boor me as they are mainly pushing technologies. That is, you sit there, and the information is sent to you - whereas, with reading, you must concentrate and try to pull out the meaning.
I have noticed that some comments talk about how some people get caught up in the world of Netflix and video games. My liberal friends will blame the medium, but I blame the person. When does personal responsibility come into play? There is nothing inherently wrong with watching TV, but when the "box is consuming your life," it is time to take stock and change your behavior.
As smart as your writing indicates that you are, I can't believe you haven't thought of this. Perhaps TV is just your way of relaxing after a tiring time thinking about your writing. As Daniel Kahneman points out in his book "Thinking, Fast and Slow," thinking about complex matters can be tiring, and this is where habits come in - they help us do things without much thought.
Enjoy your downtime, and please keep writing some fascinating essays.
I've been meaning to play video games for the past hour but I've been reading Substack's instead... you're part of the problem Matt!
"... I’m really not so sure that there is that much more to life than family and friends and work combined."
There is: dogs! (Perhaps you included them in "family.")
"... childless adults ...."
Some adults are childless, but some of us are child-free.
There's a great book by Doris Lessing, In Pursuit of the English, short and entertaining. It's about how the introduction of TV in 50's/60's Britain ripped up community life. This is an old phenomenon.
With social media, streaming, and videoconferencing, the Internet is turning into a rudimentary version of the Matrix. We can do more and more of our interaction online instead of in the real world.
That said, I'm surprised not to see mention of potential positive aspects of this wave of social change.
Blaise Pascal: "All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone."
There's evidence that blockbuster action movies and availability of video games both reduce crime ("voluntary incapacitation"). https://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhile_canadian_initi/2011/04/a-cost-effective-crime-fighting-agenda.html
This article from the day before seems relevant: https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/agora/2022/08/rise-of-the-metaverse-mean-decline-cities
I’d like to see Mr Lehman pitch his thesis to a toddler parent reading/hearing/playing THAT BOOK/SONG/incomprehensible game for the 3,456,726 time
The whole time I'm reading this, I keep thinking that this is basically the theme of WALL-E. And it's true!
Quite a number of different angles to dig into this post...but I'm running late for work (due to stopping to read SB and comment!) and so this is a scattershot rush job reply:
I certainly hope this is more nothing than ado, and especially that it isn't an actual trendline...because for those of us who *do not* get anything out of television, videogames, weed, porn, whatever - there's a real contraction of the "social possibility space". That is, there's lots of nice people I meet all the time, who seem like they'd be mutually fun to befriend. But it's ultimately a similar experience as trying to chat up strangers on the bus or in a coffee shop...you can't, cause there's just an unbroken wall of phones, whose camera eyes stare back lidlessly. And the same happens when it comes to that dreaded question, "so what are you into?" Everyone *else* streams this, games that, watches xyz movies. Even sportsball fans (I don't grok sports) are more refreshing, in many ways - that can still be streamed, but it's much more a communal activity, by design. Sitting home alone watching the Sunday handegg game: that's kind of sad. Having everyone over for a barbecue while watching the Sunday handegg game: that's a real fun time. Even for the people who aren't that much interested in the actual sport. It doesn't really work that way with, like, Netflix...it's awkward to sit and watch a show you don't actually like, just to spend time around another human being.
(I could say that's also by design, that algorithmic recommendations are necessarily tuned to individuals, and thus streaming entertainment intentionally accelerates atomization...but that's a big claim I don't feel confident trying to back up. Maybe in a counterfactual world, streaming would have been explicitly group- or family-oriented, and we'd be in a better place social-fabrically?)
There really is a lot of downtime in life, even with an onerous full-time job and multiple fascinating Substack subscriptions. I gotta do *something* while waiting up until 3AM local time for the latest hot-off-the-press MattY take. When it's very difficult to fill those gaps with other people, and the entertainment on offer is not entertaining...social life becomes dull and colourless indeed.
And I think it's harder than ever to cope with that ennui - one thing I never saw addressed in Robert Putnam's "Bowling Alone" and its kids was the idea of a stimulating expectations gap. That is, when there's an expectation that every waking moment is full of fun and surprise and entertainment, it becomes that much harder to just...be bored, let the mind wander, be struck by chance social encounters. It's something I again notice while riding public transit: not that everyone else is buried in a magic rectangle, but that I'm just...sitting there staring out the window. And that's perfectly 0k. It's a comfortable air-conditioned ride, and SF is a pretty city to look at. So I think part of the draw of modern entertainment is that minds are trained away from being able to expect (let alone tolerate and appreciate) such quiet gaps in life. It's not "escapism" as traditionally defined, it's...I hate using this awkward mental illness analogy, but like stimming for ADHD/autism. Sitting still isn't just a physical act, it's a mental one as well...a mind uncomfortable with being placidly at rest will feel a natural compulsion towards excitement. And why reach for the uncertain, messy, mediocre stimulant of other people when you could get an instant hit off your magic rectangle? Beware Trivial Inconveniences strikes again...
As to the education/risk aversion/marriage thing, I do in fact think there's a lot of meat on those bones, but that's a whole other post I'll maybe flesh out more later. Suffice to say, extended adolescence and safetyism contributes to a growing demographic segment that isn't - or *doesn't feel*, which is maybe even more important - ready for Real Adulting until quite late in life, by historical standards. This runs up against generational cohort effects, plus biological ageing - it's not at all impossible to socialize during educational years, but it does put some serious constraints on what's feasible (even just money-wise, and we know student debt is a major albatross for many trying to aim higher in life).
There's also been continued societal pressure against single and especially unmarried parenthood (not necessarily in terms of norms, but definitely in terms of laws and resources available), the whole "don't have a baby until you're Really Ready" thing. Which is good in many ways! But when one's definition of "ready" gets more and more strict...well, sometimes kids just never happen at all, it's too late. Great entertainment also funges against the other big type of social activity: dating, and relationship creation. It's - not *better* - but *less painful* than ever before to stay single. Hence all those articles bemoaning the youth sex recession, the shitty modern dating market, the declining labor force participation (why work, or work harder, if you're already comfortable; entertainment abundance lowers the floor for what's comfortable)...I dunno, Matt, I really do see it as all connected. It's definitely an idea that can be carried too far - you wrote before about marriage as a conservative poverty cure - and I think some major advocates like Jonathan Haidt's "The Coddling of the American Mind" overstate their case. But it's not a non-existent connection, imo.
I flip though the cable menu to decide what I want to watch. Usually it is something featuring the dulcet tones of David Attenborough. Sometimes an old movie.
The real danger is that James O. Incandenza's final film will be released into the wild by a group of Quebecois separatists. I hear that it's a piece of entertainment so perfect that nobody can stop watching it and we'll all just die in our chairs from lack of food.
What good is sitting alone in your room? Come hear the music play.
Life is a Cabaret old chum, come to the Cabaret!
So the proposal here is...make sure companies only make mediocre movies? Some would argue we are already there, and "shows are better today" is a value judgment easily argued against in a number of ways. What we do have is a lot MORE, more pandering, and less monoculture.
I agree with the other commenters noting that if Netflix/Marvel/whatever is enough to pull you away from your relationships and life, the problem isn't that Netflix is too good, the problem is your relationships, life, and self. GET A LIFE!
People have been making these types of arguments since the invention of media. Cable television, broadcast television, comic books, radio, novels...probably Greek theatre, if you go back far enough.
In the current moment, I think it is less about the quality or character (or lack thereof) of the entertainment and more about a societal shift focusing on celebrity, and an elevation of discussing fictional universes to something people think is actually interesting and worthwhile. People will argue about Marvel trivia. They won't pay attention to or engage with what's happening right outside their window.
"Have children to fight boredom" is the worst possible conclusion anyone could draw from any of this, with "keep working" being perhaps second worse. Neither of those solve the underlying "get a life" problem, they just distract you from your underlying issues.
Yes, I find it ironic that someone would advise people to have children in order not to be bored. I love my son with all my heart, but caring for an infant full-time is boring as f***. I always knew I didn't want to be a SAHM. (As someone told me, "Taking care of a young child uses up 100% of your energy but only 10% of your brain.")
I took a work transfer to Chicago about 10 years ago. I had two good friends from college there, but one moved soon after and the other had his third kid, so we didn't hang out that often. Also, my job became a mix of remote work and travel, so I had no office life.
Formerly a social person, I instead got way too into streaming, reading, and exercise and basically had no social life for 2.5 years. It was...kinda great. Started dipping into the great foreign shows like Borgen and early Black Mirror and realized that the recommender systems on Amazon and Goodreads can really lead to very satisfying reading if you play them right. Filled in a bunch of movie gaps.
Glad that I left and resumed a social life and eventually started a family, but I am definitely glad it happened. There really is an amazing amount of high quality entertainment at your fingertips.