I don’t think the author’s thesis is right, and actually his first inclination is correct. No one starts liking nerdy stuff because Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos does, because no one really wants to be them. They want their money, success, etc. but not to be them, in the way you’d want to be a movie star or athlete.

So I think it’s an under-discussed thing that the art forms which lend themselves to the most profitable “ecosystem” are ones that get pushed in a commercial-driven culture. You can only make so much money by selling people a book or an individual print / painting. Much better to sell merch for your media franchise, which includes books movies toys, etc.

>No one starts liking nerdy stuff because Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos does, because no one really wants to be them

Hmmm, as someone that entered high school around the time Bill Gates left Microsoft and began working at the foundation full time, I actually did genuinely idolize Bill Gates for much of the 2010s. The giving pledge, the focus on global health, the effort spent improving the lives of millions of people. This was also around the time I was regularly reading the GiveWell blog. I have genuinely spent more time fantasizing about philanthropy than I ever have fantasizing about being an athlete or movie star.