LESS IS MORON.

There’s no lack of frauds in The New York Times, but the articles are usually about them. Rarely, in my experience, do you read something     in the Times that was written by a fraud. That joy came on the morning of March 9^th, when, in the Sunday Review, Graham Hill built an intellectual slum on some of the most expensive real estate in journalism.

         
In a piece entitled, “Living With Less. A Lot Less,” Mr. Hill claims that we can have “bigger, better, richer” lives by reducing the size and number of our possessions. That we, like him, can live happily in 420-square feet. He falls 420 feet short. The only thing he delivers in abundance is bragging. He boasts about where he lived before, “A 1900-square-foot loft in Soho that befit my status as a tech entrepeneur” and where he lives now, “My space is well-built, affordable and as functional as living spaces twice the size.” Traveling before, “Bangkok, Buenos Aires and Toronto with many stops in between” and now, “My travel habit – which I try to keep in check.” 

Most of all, Graham Hill brags about the money he had before, “Flush with cash from an Internet start-up sale” ”Not everyone gets an Internet windfall before turning 30” “My partner and I sold our Internet consultancy company, Sitewerks, for more money than I thought I’d earn in a lifetime” and . . . well, he never actually says that gave away any of his money. That's significant for two reasons: it means he still has wherewithal, it just isn't where you can see it and that all personal details - anything that would keep the piece from being a giant resume cum ad for himself - is missing.

Mr. Hill never talks, for instance,about his life or work before becoming financially rich. He gives no details about his "great love" for "Olga, an Andorran beauty" and doesn't provide a single insight or dramatic incident

illustrating the cost of materialism. Instead,  he relies on vague assertions, "My relationship with stuff quickly came apart" and slow-moving clots of academic research, "Irrespective of personality, in situations that activate a consumer mindset, people show the same problematic patterns of well-being, including negative affect and social disengagement." 

The closest Graham Hill comes to being revealing or insightful is when he writes, "Often material objects take up mental as well as physical space." I'm sure that's true and, in his case, space that he can ill afford. The closest that he comes to a summary (by close I mean five paragraphs from the end) is when he writes, "Intuitively, we know that the best stuff in life isn't stuff at all, and that relationships, experiences and meaningful work are the staples of a happy life." Compressing into one sentence as boring a rehash 0f conventional wisdom as we're likely to see this side of daytime television.

"Living With Less. A Lot less." isn't a complete waste, however, because it makes three things clear. One is that, like Barbara Jordan's faith in the Constitution, Mr. Hill's self-absorption is whole. It is complete. It is total. Down to the photograph accomp- anying the article. It shows him squatting in a corner like he was worthy of a portrait by Irving Penn. (Speaking of pretensions, how about the name of his company, Sitewerks? You'd think John Von Neumann was going to de-bug your computer.) Two, why his relationship with "Olga, an Andorran beauty" ended. (If you doubt - for a second - that she left him, see above.) The third is that if he wants to make a lot of money - and we know that he does - he should sue the people who educated him. Apparently, they overlooked Henry David Thoreau and his statement that, "Our life is frittered away by detail. Simplify, simplify."