Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Slumming.

I thought this story was incredible. The notion of billionaires taking a break from their wealth and becoming like any other bum on the streets is impressive. In a way, this story glorifies poverty - but only in the sense that when you have nothing, that includes having no responsibilities. Without being burdened by their image, Evelyn and Packer had the opportunity to just enjoy being alive. They really didn't have any cares or worries.
More than glorifying poverty, this story really degrades wealth. Without wealth, you can better appreciate the small things in life. "Just Packer's arms around his wife could be a duplex on Park Avenue. A villa in Crete." Evelyn and Packer no longer saw the need for fancy things, because they were happy with just each other. For them, being "homeless" was a great awakening into a whole new perspective of the world around them.
The girl who was kidnapped and murdered was a wealthy and attractive young woman. She was probably kidnapped because of her money - putting the high social status even lower on the "happy" scale. I thought that really was an important detail. It was also important for Evelyn and Packer to watch her try to escape and to be seen. Neither side of the spectrum is perfect. Wealth has its downsides, as does poverty.

I really enjoyed Inky's outlook on things. To her, everything was different than how it appeared. This is the new that, that's the new this. Everything was backward, and to some, she might seem crazy. I think she really had a lot of insight, though. There are things about being anonymous and hidden that really are the new famous.

I just really liked this story.
Very much. :)

1 comment:

  1. I'm glad you liked the story, Pearl. It's a bit too unsettling for some...

    >> There are things about being anonymous and hidden that really are the new famous.<<

    Yes...no doubt. Ironically, though, in witnessing the murder, Evelyn contributes to the murder of many undeserving homeless people. Perhaps our freedom comes only at the expense of others...?

    ReplyDelete