Columnist Taoism
To snark is to be impressed with the opinion that you are writing; the more you consider your argument to be inviolable, and the weaker and more ad populum it is, the snarkier it is.
To snark is to fall victim to the fashion of the moment. Fashion does not matter. Hence, the snarkier you are, the less you matter.
I’ve found that this last sentence is rapidly becoming the foundation of my political philosophy. First, consider all sources of news and opinion on a matter; second, discount or discard these sources directly according to their snarkiness. Third, look carefully at the heaviest things you’ve got left.
This is why Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh don’t matter. This is why Molly Ivins and Tom Tomorrow don’t matter. This is why Aaron Swartz matters, but Aaron Sorkin doesn’t; why George Will mostly matters, but Mallard Fillmore doesn’t. This is why the Daily Show, bless it, doesn’t matter. This is why Seth Schoen matters. This is why Orson Scott Card used to matter, and doesn’t matter anymore.
It’s not just about how seriously you take your subject matter. It’s possible (if rare) to be light-hearted about something without being snarky, and even if you treat your flamewar with Gawker like it was your daughter’s life, that doesn’t make it worth anyone’s while. It’s about consideration and logical rigor, about resisting the cheap shots and the urge to smirk. It’s about speaking to principles and facts, not targets; it’s about not gloating. It’s about the setting aside of childish things.
I don’t matter, not yet, because I liked writing this too much. There’s a vicious glee in outright dismissing the people who pollute the bandwidth of political discourse, and Dave Eggers would call me out on doing it.
