Adam Greenfield, who has just shuffled off these islands of Japan, sums up his two-year stint here, using the new Roppongi Hills project as metaphor:
Here is where I see the greatest, saddest parallel between this building project and my daily experience of contemporary Japan: in the clamor of these voices, and all the superlatives they evoke, Roppongi Hills is absolutely desperate to fill every space, to shut out doubt with affirmations not even of its specialness, but of its simple existence. Like an idiot beacon shrieking “I’m here! I’m here!” into the humid night, Roppongi Hills inserts itself into every possible vista, spoors the entire neighborhood with its sonic effluvium.
Read the whole thing. Sobering. (Above image of Roppongi Hills shot on July 5, 2003, on Fuji Neopan 1600 film).
Alternative Title – “Another Ethnocentric Gaijin Gets Homesick”
I agree with David’s alternative title. It seems like no one will say it, and it seems that he has a lot of groupies following him around hanging on his every word; but I have to say that the a major portion of Adam Greenfield is pompous phoney jackass. I heard that his closing statements at the mob blogging conference were classic exercises in Adam trying to use words that were to big for him. This article, while making some good points, is mainly just more whining. Adam writes some good stuff, I particularly liked his Style versus Design piece (I think it was titled “The Bathing Ape Has No Clothes”), but most of his stuff is wankery and whining pure and simple and that isn’t even looking at some of his comments on metafilter. I think there are some gems in Adam’s writing, but please no one take it too seriously.
I’m not sure, but I don’t think Adam likes Roppongi hills.
“most of his stuff is wankery”
Agreed, but he wanks so well. Adam has the right stuff. He just needs more life experience. Right now he’s a bit like Ben Franklin’s famed, “fish in moonlight”.
Hopefully time will erode away the prentiousness. Then he’ll be unstoppable.
Wait a second! I think I met this guy once at the FCCJ. Yeah, he kinda rubbed the wrong way, but he has talent. As opposed to calling him ethnocentric, I think you should just call him self-centric.
He claims at the beginning that things like “Akira and Tetsuo, the Iron Man,” and “a thousand Sony ads, ten thousand pictures of orange-haired, cellphone-wielding Harajuku schoolgirls in towering platform boots” drew him to Japan. And then when he gets here and finds those very things he’s upset?
hmmm….
Well, obviously since I linked to it, I found a lot of food for thought in the piece, and a lot of things that resonated with thoughts I have about this country. Granted, the man definitely uses words too big for his britches (there were at least three words I went “huh” to and I’d like to think my vocabulary is pretty good), which does a disservice to his message and tends to make his writing seem pretentious. Mike Davis he’s not, but that’s okay.
I must say I wish more folks would toe the line he’s toeing, which is to say not the boosterish “Japan is so weird and cool” rah-rah, or the fucked gaijin “this hell-hole is so fucked up” approach, but rather criticism (and praise) that is measured, and written by folks who obviously care about the place enough to write passionately and extensively about it.
Japan through the lens of Roppongi Hills
through the lens… nice tittle kurt
x
Thanks for linking the piece, Kurt.
Vocabulary-wise, well, what can I say? That’s the way I talk (and think). I don’t do it to impress, or confound. The fake-ass thing, as far as I can see, would be to edit or change it for consumption.
I’m glad if you get something out of it, and sorry if you don’t.
I reread what I wrote above, and should really rephrase something. Aside from the scattered typos and a ‘a’ with no apparent reason for being, I realized that something in my comment had not come out as intended:
I wrote:
“but I have to say that the a major portion of Adam Greenfield is pompous phoney jackass.”
what I meant to say is:
but I have to say that the majority of Adam Greenfield’s writing sounds like it comes from a pompous, phoney jackass. I didn’t mean to judge Adam as a person, I meant to focus on his writing (both the style and content).
Now I would like to respond to Adam’s comment here, where he says the following:
“Vocabulary-wise, well, what can I say? That’s the way I talk (and think). I don’t do it to impress, or confound. The fake-ass thing, as far as I can see, would be to edit or change it for consumption.”
Is editing writing to make it readable, approachable, and precise “fake-ass?” I’ve always thought that editing was an important part of the writing process, and although I skimp on it on my own blog I would never have thought to call it fake.
The vocabulary in Adam’s writing isn’t a problem. I have to consult a dictionary if I have one handy every once in a while, but why choose a long rarely used word, when a short concise one would be better if not to seem smart?
Adam, you obviously spend a lot of time thinking deeply about things, and if you’d spend a little more time on being humble or at least faking it effectively I think that your writing would be ten times better. That’s my two cents, take it or leave it.
Thanks for that clarification, Bob. I guess.
I don’t know what to say. I happen to think I *am* humble, in all the important ways: I never operate under any illusion that anything I say is important to anyone but myself, I am grateful for the time and attention people devote to engaging my writing, and I spend a good deal of space not merely feeling but expressing that gratitude (for that and for all the other good things life has placed before me).
I am careful to namecheck my influences, and I always, always thank the people whose hard work and insights I depend on. Since you seem to be familiar with a good deal of my writing, I’d think you would have seen this. I’m really not sure how much further anybody can be expected to go in pursuit of self-grounding.
But you know what? Defending myself this way feels weird, and bad. So I’m not going to do it anymore. I’m truly sorry you think my writing makes me sound so pompous and self-important, but, you know, it was a wise person who said you can’t please everyone.
As for my being “homesick” and “ethnocentric,” well, as I pretty clearly say in the piece, there’s not much I can do about charges of ethnocentricity even if I don’t happen to believe they’re relevant. (That’s one of those “when did you stop beating your wife?” sorts of things.) And “homesick”? Not in the slightest. You can disagree with the substance of what I say, dislike the execution, or find it completely inarticulate, but dismissing it like that is just rude.
Sorry, Kurt, for taking up space on your site with this noise and flak.