Dan’s review of The Myth of Christmas Starting Earlier Every Year

Dan prefers to think the Nessie does exist, because there’s no proof that it doesn’t.

Here we go again. It seems as though, once again, my opinion is wrong and has been invalidated by our site’s speech-impairing oppressor, the same man who makes up words like “opinionary” for use in his reviews. The opinion in question is my agreeance with the masses that the Christmas season is starting a bit earlier than normal this year. I have presented four facts proving that the department stores, media outlets, and product manufacturers have started promoting Christmas-themed items well before Thanksgiving. I provided dates for numerous events that occurred this year, not some vague concept of a time long ago, yet his rambling review is supposed to have more credibility than mine, just because it came more recently? I don’t see how this can fly. Sure, my facts may be wrong, and if presented with proper evedence that shows Santa coming to the mall before November 19th in any past years, or The Grinch airing before November 13th in the past, well then I am all about offering a retraction statement. Unfortunately for my detractors, I have very high doubts about said evidence’s existence. The reality is that Walmart has gone on record stating that their campaign, which started on November 1st this year was the earliest it’s ever been. Toys R US sent their first catalogue out the day after Halloween. Looking at the internet, it seems that either most of the evidence seems to agree with me, or it’s just more popular to agree with my point of view, as I’ve found numerous articles from places like the Chicago Tribune, one of Upstate New York’s top news outlets, and Dan’s favorite, USA Today. Of course, there are stores who are still sticking to the more traditional Thanksgiving-time start to the season, but if just two of those stores would start earlier, I would still be justified in saying that some stores are pushing Christmas merchandise earlier.

I suppose I’m getting away from Dan’s review, so let’s look at it, paragraph by paragraph. First of all, the picture caption. It’s said that I hate Christmas. While I actually laughed at the caption, it’s simply not true. In fact, Christmas is probably my favorite holiday, because there’s actually something to do, unlike the boring Thanksgiving, the all-too-saccharine Easter, and the incredibly depressing Valentine’s Day. Not only that, but nothing in my review states that I have any dislike for the holiday.

Next, he states that I have offered no valid negative effects of Christmas coming earlier each year. If I would’ve offered the negatives, I’m sure I would’ve been chastised for taking up valuable space with cliched arguments that one can find anywhere else on the worldwide web. If my implications in the review weren’t enough, I’ll put them explicitly. The continued expansion of the Christmas season has led to a decline in the amount of celebration of the Thanksgiving holiday, and potentially soon-to-be the Halloween holiday. In addition, the purveyors of said trends run the risk of creating a dissatisfaction with the holiday spirit, weeks before the holiday actually arrives, making it all the less enjoyable for us, the consumer, and the people who have to deal with Christmas songs 24/7.

Next, it is stated that I offered no comparison to years before, which is completely inaccurate. I offer that Santa used to come on Thanksgiving, the entire reason the Macy’s Parade exists in the first place. I also offer that in my childhood, I don’t remember Christmas progamming starting until at least after Thanksgiving, as I used to consider the showing of Rudolph and Frosty to be quite early. I then go on to say that it is completely inappropriate for candy to be Christmas-themed before Halloween, mostly because I’m not used to it being sold that early.

After this, he misreads my attempt at satire (in this specific case, exaggerating the start of the Christmas merchandising season to begin in July) as completely serious. In reality, I was searching for a picture of Santa on the beach, but this was the best picture I could find. I in no way actually believe that the Christmas season would ever start before Halloween (there’s too much merchandising to be made in the Halloween holiday that Thanksgiving doesn’t offer, as well as running the risk of completely alienating their consumers), let alone July.

I suppose that by using this thought process, Dan is literally suggesting that I transform myself into some sort of sheep and time travel back to twenty years ago to see that Christmas music was playing on the radio on November 1st (which is not an exaggeration), see the err of my ways, and come begging on my knees for forgiveness for being “wrong”. I don’t pretend that I’m not agreeing with all the other half-wits who haven’t thought this through, but the last time I disagreed with all the sheep who were following each other in agreeance, I was ripped apart anyway.

I’m not averse to Christmas being a season. In fact, it is a season, and always has been in the Church calendar. But that season starts four weeks before Christmas. Even this year, with Christmas falling on a Sunday, and Advent actually starting five weeks before Christmas, the season doesn’t start until November 27th, again, after Thanksgiving. My point was that this is the first year that I’ve seen significant proof that the people who have been harping on this point for years might be right. My disclaimer at the end effictively showed that in order to see if this is true, we would have to wait until a few years from now. Because I did not have the forethought to write down specific dates of things in the past, does that mean that my opinion should be considered wrong and invalidated? I don’t think so.


Dan’s Review of The Myth of Christmas Coming Earlier Every Year gets two stars, mostly because he presented little evidence to prove his case, instead relying on meandering, obscure ideas about the grass being greener on the other side and the probability that old people are wrong simply because they complain a lot and don’t always remember things. I’m not saying that he is wrong, per se, just that it appears as though my evidence greatly outweighs his, thereby lending more credence to my opinion. In addition, for a review that was specifically not supposed to be a review about my review, he spent more time discussing the merits of my ideas, instead of presenting his own case. I may be lashed for speaking out against the upper management, but perhaps this serves to be the last of the unwarranted reviews of other people’s reviews, namely those presented by the Junior Staff.

4 Replies to “Dan’s review of The Myth of Christmas Starting Earlier Every Year”

  1. At the risk of demotion from my already figurehead-like position on the Junior Staff…

    Nate wins (from a purely scientific view)

  2. It’s really sad that the Junior Staff’s Editor-at-Large will provide solid reviews supported by actual evidence only after the Site’s Upper Management challenges him. That lack of initiative is the type of character flaw which terminally condemns staff members to positions in middle management.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.