For me it was poignant as the story of a young man who has for his entire life been keen on reading, writing, and communicating, who has in a way achieved what he was looking to achieve, and unknowingly created a set of shackles from his own success/fame that he's struggling to reason with and untangle. I can't imagine the pressure of loving to critique books, but then being slapped with labels like “#1 most read on GoodReads” . How could you make fun critique videos knowing that an honest negative critique could tank an author's career? It seems like a lot of pressure.

His quote about internet "community" also especially struck me as poignant: “You have this illusion of community when we’re really very alone.” There are loads of young people who I imagine have an over-emphasis in their lives on online "community", and I really do think it is an illusion. I've been toying with the idea whether community can really even exist if you can't see each other in person.

I'd be curious as to your interpretation that led to you finding the article poignant in the archaic sense (sharp or pungent in taste or smell) or dystopian.

I read what you're saying. I don't want to go into detail about all the things in the article that rubbed me the wrong way, although saying that makes me feel like I owe that, so, sorry about that.

I will say: I don't know who _you_ are, but I feel like _the average Joe_ would love to be this guy and would love to have his problems instead of Joe's.

Succumbing to the pressure of knowing "an honest negative critique could tank an author's career" sounds like a skill issue, as the young folk say. If that's your worry, you are not this Joe's reviewer! I want an _honest_ critique! That that's a lot to ask of my number one TikTok bookfluencer is dystopian!