We can think that the makers of super-things are supermen, but it is not so. We make super things, but we ourselves are not superman. We see super-things presented in advertisements, but super-men are not presented as their makers. For example, super trousers are advertised, but not super-tailors.
The things that are super-things now are super in names only. The world in which we find these super-things is the same as it was earlier without "super" things. Humorously and critically, the writer compares the increase in super-things to the increase in the supply of paper money. When the supply of paper money of the same value is doubled, its value is halved. So when too many titles like peers are given to people, their value gets reduced too much. When we have super-things like super-soaps all around, the value of "super" goes.
We are proud of things, not of persons. When we have too many super-things with us like titles of peers or counts, we reduce the value of these. It id critically noted that we are proud of the things that we make than of ourselves who make them. We are not proud of our dramatists and artists, but of our things.
We in the 20th century are not proud of our own qualities as exhibited in our works. Rather, we talk highly of our super-products. Like Rockefeller (great American industrialist and helper of the poor in the twentieth century), the richest are super-millionaires, not men of unusual qualities. The dress of the people, unlike the dress of the people of olden times (like that of the 15th century Prince), does not show their personal qualities.
The things that are super-things now are super in names only. The world in which we find these super-things is the same as it was earlier without "super" things. Humorously and critically, the writer compares the increase in super-things to the increase in the supply of paper money. When the supply of paper money of the same value is doubled, its value is halved. So when too many titles like peers are given to people, their value gets reduced too much. When we have super-things like super-soaps all around, the value of "super" goes.
We are proud of things, not of persons. When we have too many super-things with us like titles of peers or counts, we reduce the value of these. It id critically noted that we are proud of the things that we make than of ourselves who make them. We are not proud of our dramatists and artists, but of our things.
We in the 20th century are not proud of our own qualities as exhibited in our works. Rather, we talk highly of our super-products. Like Rockefeller (great American industrialist and helper of the poor in the twentieth century), the richest are super-millionaires, not men of unusual qualities. The dress of the people, unlike the dress of the people of olden times (like that of the 15th century Prince), does not show their personal qualities.
No comments:
Post a Comment