Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

If you read that 5 times over, maybe it's worth including more of the context of the phrase:

> Mr. Roth was the last of the great white males: the triumvirate of writers — Saul Bellow and John Updike were the others — who towered over American letters in the second half of the 20th century.

Seems that "great white males" refers to a specific trio of writers -- all white men -- who were seen as the giants of American literature in a specific era in history.

What's your specific objection?




That he used the term "great white males" when he should have used "Great Male Narcissists". Would a high school newspaper even make a mistake such as this? It's either sloppy, malicious, or both.


If someone referred to a "great black male" writer would you be equally offended? Or do you object to mention of his race? His sex? These details help paint a picture. They are not mentioned to offend.


If you read the article, he is defining this group of 'great white males' to be three writers who the literary world actually refer to as 'The Great Narcissists'.

https://www.dfwsociety.org/2017/12/02/call-for-papers-great-...

He specifically substituted 'narcissist' with 'white male' as if he's using it as a synonym.



Sorry, I'm not following. Is "Great Male Narcissists" a popular pronoun in this context?



You've linked to something associated with David Foster Wallace, but the author of the NYT obit is not David Foster Wallace.


Both terms seem equally redundant. Why stress?




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: