Lena Dunham's new HBO series Girls has inspired conversations, backlash, hate, and love, but mostly it's inspired a ton of writing. As we predicted at the end of last week, the conversation would not end with episode 1, nor the week following episode 1. And so with episode 2, right on time, we get a whole bunch more conversation.
Along with all the standard recaps, there's John Cook doing another old-man recap in Gawker. There's Foster Kamer interviewing a dude about what dudes think about Girls for Jezebel. There's Anna Holmes' New Yorker follow-up to the questions of race and diversity that kept us busy talking last week and into this one. And then there's this piece in The New York Times (one of these things is not like the others). It starts out pretty normally, with writer Natalie Angier reminding us of what Hannah, the character played by Lena Dunham on the show, is up against—complications ranging from her finances to her relationships to, in general, life. And then things go a little off the expected path.
"As in urban jungles, so too in jungle jungles. Researchers have lately gathered abundant evidence that female friendship is one of nature’s preferred narrative tools," writes Angier. "In animals as diverse as African elephants and barnyard mice, blue monkeys of Kenya and feral horses of New Zealand, affiliative, longlasting and mutually beneficial relationships between females turn out to be the basic unit of social life, the force that not only binds existing groups together but explains why the animals’ ancestors bothered going herd in the first place."