The World Cup caused me to have an important insight myself, which is the kind of insight I like best.
For I realized that while I have no interest in soccer itself, and I cannot talk about soccer at all, I am interested in the way people talk about soccer – not what they are saying, but how they say it, and what it means to them. The tears of the Brazilians were more interesting to me that who won the World Cup (Germany? Holland?). I read with fascination not just an article on how Mick Jagger is considered a jinx in soccer, in that any team he supports is sure to lose, but also the comments below the article, where people argued that this was just a huge cultural joke -a humorous riff at the expense of the celebrity.
The realization brought some peace to me, for I now know for sure that after switching university subjects three or four times, I am finally, while pushing forty, in the right field, because it is all about how people socially relate to things. Good to know.
But then I realized that’s how I relate to most things. I’m not interested in relationships, but I like hearing people talk about their relationships- I don’t shop as such, but it’s interesting to listen to various girlfriends talk about Michael Kors bags and Pandora bracelets, as cultural phenomena, as it were. Or drinking. Or films and TV shows. Or friends. Or parenting. Why do people parent the way they do? What do they say about their children? Or their home decor? Or the music they listen to or don’t listen to?
The surrounding talk, then, is more interesting than the actual thing. I suppose that is part of the attraction of blogging for me, which has proven ceaseless so far: the endless opportunity to talk around different things, rather than focus relentlessly on any one particular thing. Blogging. An endless meta commentary, a commentary on the commentary.