When Frank Bruni was hired as an op/ed columnist for the New York Times, I doubted that he was qualified. His latest column puts those doubts to rest. Bruni is totally unqualified. The piece reads like a livejournal rant.
In a nutshell: Bruni's glad there won't be any more Harry Potter movies because he never bothered to get into Harry Potter and he's sick of hearing about it. Bruni has several friends who each dislike something that other people are really into and they're frustrated too.
Sometimes, Bruni observes, people initially resist trends but later end up becoming fans of stuff they originally thought was dumb.
Bruni and some of his friends sometimes pretend to be fans of shows they don't watch because they're desperate to fit in:
My friend J. persuasively faked fandom of “Lost,” thus evading censure from genuinely addicted peers, and I have repeatedly passed myself off as a “Sopranos” savant, on the basis of only four episodes. I watched none of the finale, though I produced very strongly articulated opinions about it.
As for Potter, I saw 10 minutes of one of the movies, and can’t recall if it involved a goblet of fire, a deathly hallow or neither. Hogwarts was mentioned, so I’m now up to speed. It’s like Exeter, but with a different kind of spelling test.
I'm glad Bruni feels comfortable admitting that he's a poseur. This admission confirms the suspicions I had about Bruni as a political reporter and as a food critic.
It's good to know upfront that your op/ed columnist is so insecure that he'll generate spurious opinions rather than admit that he's not well-informed or even interested in the topic at hand.
Everyone fronts from time to time, but it's disconcerting to realize that Bruni thinks this bad habit is something to brag about.