Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Cat Person” and Me

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 175 posts

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#91

Post by sgt101 »

caslon wrote: post #13
danso wrote: post #5

One of the most incredible essays I’ve read in a long time. The author describes a bizarre situation exacerbated by tragedy. There’s no clear remedy or villain for what she’s going through, and that’s just the way life is. I liked the “Cat Person” story when it came out, but I would much rather see this essay be made into a movie

Isn't there a villain, though? A creepy internet stalker writes a story about her stalkee's life, monetizes it and gets critical acclaim (and, again, a seven-figure advance for a collection of short stories that only had value due to that story ) for it, causing her strife? I can't help but feel that there's a clear villain here, and a villain that's trying to paint herself as the victim at that.

But it wasn't about the "stalkee's life" it was an imagined story inspired by imagined characters inspired by the situation she observed. Cat Person wasn't like Charles - Charles seems to have been someone else entirely. I can imagine going to a BBQ and meeting Charles and liking him, I don't think that would be the case with Cat Person. The people who are the villains are the ones who looked at Charles and decided that Charles was Cat Person - they are like people who look at blond girls and think "idiot" and people who look at black people and think... well I won't go into what racists think. It's not the same - but it's similar, it's prejudice - less harsh and less pervasive, but it's how dumb people operate.

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#92

Post by sgt101 »

scandox wrote: post #82
caslon wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't there a villain, though? A creepy internet stalker writes a story about her stalkee's life, monetizes it and gets critical acclaim (and, again, a seven-figure advance for a collection of short stories that only had value due to that story ) for it, causing her strife? I can't help but feel that there's a clear villain here, and a villain that's trying to paint herself as the victim at that.

This is a very slippery slope. Writers imbibe all kinds of details from life, from gossip, from their families....writers are interested in people's lives. The only difference here is the apparently stark difference of her using social media as her source of detail. But it's really no different than if she read a newspaper article about someone online and borrowed detail from that. Perhaps the only crime here, if cri…

It's a pretty good story though - much to admire about it.

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#93

Post by sgt101 »

prvc wrote: post #39
caslon wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't there a villain, though? A creepy internet stalker writes a story about her stalkee's life, monetizes it and gets critical acclaim (and, again, a seven-figure advance for a collection of short stories that only had value due to that story ) for it, causing her strife? I can't help but feel that there's a clear villain here, and a villain that's trying to paint herself as the victim at that.

A superficial appraisal of the situation would have Cat Person be a mere amalgam of details plagiarized from social media with an ideologically derived ersatz-archetype-- a lie bolstered by purloined facts. This article, however, brings for the first time depth and truth to the former text. Flaubert famously quipped, "Madame Bovary, c'est moi!". In the same vein, the ugly side of Cat Person 's male character may not…

Surely that's how all characters are constructed - from the authors imagination? Where else can they come from but via the lens of the writer?

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#94

Post by sgt101 »

prvc wrote: post #43
tptacek wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of fiction writers use real people as the bases for characters; that doesn't make them "creepy internet stalkers". Cat Person was a work of fiction. There wasn't much ambiguity about that.

"All true your honor, but I said the word fiction beforehand!"

But the article here makes it clear it was fiction - Charles wasn't that guy, "the hostile text messages were alien to me".

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#95

Post by Lio »

tptacek wrote: post #31
Firebrand wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a story about Charles the software developer, who lives in Chicago, being a horrible, predatory romantic partner. Not trying to imply that you are one of course, but that’s about as much detail she changed from the real life story—just the names. And now it was so successful that there’s going to be made about it starring Cousin Greg from HBO’s Succession. People love to gossip and will eventually put two and…

She didn't change "just the names". As the Slate article observes, she changes half the story . That's what people are mad about: that her work of fiction is mostly fictional.

I believe it's which half of the story she fictionalised which bothers people.

She didn't take two fictionalised people and give them someone's perfectly normal, boring sex life.

Instead she took two real people including detailed descriptions of them accurate enough that they could later be correctly identified.

She then twisted their relationship to make one a victim and the other, her former romantic parter, a cartoon misogynist.

Those that recognise the people involved may well still think "well there's no smoke without fire" regardless of her claim that it's all "fictional".

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#96

Post by zozbot234 »

ReptileMan wrote: post #88
DoreenMichele wrote: post #56

To me, the most disturbing part of this is the following section: I made plans to rent an apartment with some girls from my econ class the following year, but they told me they’d changed their minds when they found out about my older boyfriend. I'm a woman and I blog. I have made a stab at writing fiction, often loosely based on my life. People tend to assume it is 100 percent true . When I was getting divorced, if I…

I think that this effect is localized in what can be described as "deep blue feminist college educated media women" bubble. That just happens to be uniquely vocal because of the media positions they hold. In the real world it is more nuanced (and nobody really cares)

On the contrary, vilifying men who don't meet one's arbitrary social standards is a deeply conservative idea as well. The fact "deep blue feminist college-educated media" folks share such notions doesn't mean the other side is any better - if anything, the whole idea of men's rights as something that's inherently worthwhile is still remarkably niche.

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#97

Post by vidarh »

caslon wrote: post #13
danso wrote: post #5

One of the most incredible essays I’ve read in a long time. The author describes a bizarre situation exacerbated by tragedy. There’s no clear remedy or villain for what she’s going through, and that’s just the way life is. I liked the “Cat Person” story when it came out, but I would much rather see this essay be made into a movie

Isn't there a villain, though? A creepy internet stalker writes a story about her stalkee's life, monetizes it and gets critical acclaim (and, again, a seven-figure advance for a collection of short stories that only had value due to that story ) for it, causing her strife? I can't help but feel that there's a clear villain here, and a villain that's trying to paint herself as the victim at that.

You can see it as a villain, but the way it is presented it does not seem Nowicki sees Roupenian as a villain (though maybe she did at one point).

I think the essay is more subtle than that. She ends by describing "what's difficult about having your relationship rewritten and memorialized", rather than any sharp criticism. She describes herself as angry and frustrated earlier, but having appreciated that Roupenian was sorry.

It's quite nuanced. A lot of the essay also focuses more on other peoples (real world) interpretation of her relationship, rather than on the fictional story ("My relationship with Charles was full of shame brought on by people who assumed the worst—a predatory man asserting his power over an innocent girl").

Part of the essay focuses on how the story "blurs the boundaries between the real and the invented" but also how that affected both Charles and her in that it made him question whether he had acted like the fictional character, and "sometimes, to my own disappointment, I find myself inclined to trust Roupenian over myself" about her relationship.

The essay is just as much about how we tend to assume a lot of fiction is truer than it is when it includes even some details from reality - to the point where Nowicki finds herself trusting a total strangers interpretation of her own relationship - a relationship said stranger had never observed directly.

A key line to me is "I’ve wondered a lot about the line between fiction and nonfiction, and what license is actually bestowed by the act of labeling something as fiction." This seems to get at the core of what this essay is, with Roupenian being more of a prop to discuss this subject grounded in a real situation than a villain per se. Almost every negative about Roupenian is accompanied by a counterpoint, that while not entirely negating what is often critical does soften it.

E.g "At times I’ve convinced myself that she wanted us to know it was about us" - something that if true would certainly tip Roupenian into villain territory - is followed by "But then I remind myself that when she wrote “Cat Person,” she was still in her MFA program. No one knew her name. Submitting a story to the New Yorker was a long shot, and a piece of literary short fiction had never gone viral in this way."

It also goes towards making the argument that Roupenian was likely more toughtless than malicious, and that her thoughtlessness was somewhat understandable and would have meant very little if not for accidents of circumstance.

Does it put Roupenian in a somewhat negative light? Sure. It was stupid and thoughtless of her not to change details. But villain? I don't think she's important enough even to this essay, to be the villain of it. She plays a perfunctory part of a much more interesting story about Alexis and Charles, their relationship, and how seeing it reflected in the fictional story affected them.

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#98

Post by vidarh »

Lio wrote: post #95
tptacek wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She didn't change "just the names". As the Slate article observes, she changes half the story . That's what people are mad about: that her work of fiction is mostly fictional.

I believe it's which half of the story she fictionalised which bothers people. She didn't take two fictionalised people and give them someone's perfectly normal, boring sex life. Instead she took two real people including detailed descriptions of them accurate enough that they could later be correctly identified. She then twisted their relationship to make one a victim and the other, her former romantic parter, a car…

This is exactly it. I've seen nobody upset that Roupenian borrowed details, but at keeping enough details unchanged to give room for those who recognise the people to question which part is fiction and which is true in a way that casts shadows over the people it was at least party based on.

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#99

Post by [deleted] »

GauntletWizard wrote: post #4

I dated a girl seven years younger than me. We were both in our twenties at the time, and I assumed she was a few years older and she thought I was a few years younger and when it actually came up I struggled with it but went forward. She's got an interesting background, and has been horrifically abused, and once told me I was the first person she ever trusted after having sex. Not that the confession was after sex,…

[deleted]

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#100

Post by AdrianB1 »

adjkant wrote: post #78
SmirthsDAC wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm going to strongly disagree with that, and not sure how you decided that was objectively true. My argument was to point out a lack of good reason in the first place to have concerns over the age gaps. I agreed life experience can be different, even significantly, I just don't see evidence or reasoning (in any conversation on this topic) it has anything to do with greater potential or likelihood of abuse or any d…

> greater potential or likelihood of abuse or any degree of taking advantage of people. It seems like this is the core of the disagreement. The factors here are complex, but here are some things I would point to as a starting point: - You often have large financial differences that can start completely accidental power imbalances in otherwise healthy relationships if not managed closely. This can happen regardless of…

The brain development difference is not a valid argument: even at 18 a person has the same right to vote like a 60 years old one. If you let 18 year old people decide the fate of the society, they should be more than fully capable of deciding for themselves or the voting age is terribly wrong.
Post reply on HN