![Marco, floored by Gruber’s positive review of a laptop. The review is what it is: both preening and fawning, as the man once said, and constrained less by its mediocre, overblown style than by its subject, which is a fucking computer.
However: what’s the rest of this mean? That this review proves that his best years aren’t behind him? Let’s pretend that the review is great, brilliant, an act of genius; how could it establish that Gruber’s best years aren’t behind him? It is itself now part of his past, a past monumental with tech-literary achievements, I guess.
And the post-dash clause: “this decade was just the first.” What does that mean? It was the first [decade of a great career we can now see taking shape]? It was the first [decade of three]?
Three paragraphs in, and it’s clear that my best years aren’t behind me —this paragraph was just the fourth.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8x2codPsP1rz5hbqo1_500.png "Marco, floored by Gruber’s positive review of a laptop. The review is what it is: both preening and fawning, as the man once said, and constrained less by its mediocre, overblown style than by its subject, which is a fucking computer.
However: what’s the rest of this mean? That this review proves that his best years aren’t behind him? Let’s pretend that the review is great, brilliant, an act of genius; how could it establish that Gruber’s best years aren’t behind him? It is itself now part of his past, a past monumental with tech-literary achievements, I guess.
And the post-dash clause: “this decade was just the first.” What does that mean? It was the first [decade of a great career we can now see taking shape]? It was the first [decade of three]?
Three paragraphs in, and it’s clear that my best years aren’t behind me —this paragraph was just the fourth.")
Marco, floored by Gruber’s positive review of a laptop. The review is what it is: both preening and fawning, as the man once said, and constrained less by its mediocre, overblown style than by its subject, which is a fucking computer.
However: what’s the rest of this mean? That this review proves that his best years aren’t behind him? Let’s pretend that the review is great, brilliant, an act of genius; how could it establish that Gruber’s best years aren’t behind him? It is itself now part of his past, a past monumental with tech-literary achievements, I guess.
And the post-dash clause: “this decade was just the first.” What does that mean? It was the first [decade of a great career we can now see taking shape]? It was the first [decade of three]?
Three paragraphs in, and it’s clear that my best years aren’t behind me —this paragraph was just the fourth.
