Published 2025-08-12
tag(s): #random-thoughts #emacs
There's a "blog carnival" going around asking people for their Emacs elevator pitch. First things first, I loved this post by Randy Ridenour:
It’s very simple. There is one thing that I have never heard an Emacs user say:
"I’m forced to use Emacs for this particular task, but I sure wish I could use something else."
Why would you not want to at least try something that its users love that much?
It is a great answer. Of the couple I read so far, it is by far my favorite.
While the thought exercise of simplifying something to present it is good, and being concise is an art in itself[1], the notion that everything needs an elevator pitch is, in my opinion, flawed.
I see this as an extension of the modern tendencies to have everything, now. "If you
can't explain this idea in 15 seconds, then your idea is not worth it".
How about if you can't spare 5 minutes to listen to me, you are not worthy of
my time.
That is of course just an opinion, but fear not, I did my research! I opened the Wikipedia page for "elevator pitch", wondering if this was another silly VC-fueled idea, or something older.
One commonly-known origin story is that of Rosenzweig and Caruso, two former journalists active in the 1990s. According to Rosenzweig, Caruso was a senior editor at Vanity Fair and was continuously attempting to pitch story ideas to the Editor-In-Chief at the time, but could never pin her down long enough to do so simply because she was always on the move. So, in order to pitch her ideas, Caruso would join her during short free periods of time she had, such as on an elevator ride. Thus, the concept of an elevator pitch was created, as says Rosenzweig.
I feel like that story is proving my point. Isn't part of the editor-in-chief job to hear
pitches for stories? She was too busy to her job? Then she needs help, not for others to
chase her down the hallways.
There's also...
[...] another known potential origin [...] Philip Crosby [...] suggested individuals should have a pre-prepared speech that can deliver information regarding themselves or a quality that they can provide within [...] the amount of time of an elevator ride for if an individual finds themselves on an elevator with a prominent figure. Essentially, an elevator pitch is meant to allow an individual to, with very limited time, pitch themselves or an idea to a person who is high up in a company.
...and it follows with story about how he proposed something to the CEO in the elevator and then the amazing happened.
I guess that's another part of the elevator pitch that bothers me, it keeps the narrative that
you need some sort of magical encounter or nothing changes[2].
Most products are developed over time, hitting roadblocks and going back to
the drawing board. Not everything is a leap of faith by an about-to-go-under-company that
suddenly becomes rich, and not every executive has to be so busy that your
only chance of having a human interaction with them is in an elevator.
Actually, if they are so busy, they probably want that time to wind down. And play Candy Crush. Or write on their personal blog about dudes randomly approaching them with sales pitches in elevators and how annoying that is.
But seriously, if an organization "needs" random encounters in hallways instead of having proper channels to hear all voices and ideas, as they should...then they deserve to go under. Update your resume and take your pitch somewhere else.
The other problem I have with the elevator pitch has more to do with my recent tendencies to slowing down, whether it is in tech, life, work, etc.
Maybe an idea, product, or in this case software, needs time to be appreciated. Notice that the pitch I shared above is great, but doesn't really explain anything. It appeals to your emotions, maybe even to FOMO.
That's because to appreciate how Emacs is different from other editors, you have to use it at
least for a few days and try to configure something and experience how malleable it
is. But that statement, at face value, sounds like a gazillion other tools. To appreciate the
difference, you have to really sit with it.
And maybe you don't feel like that commitment is worth it, and that is perfectly fine. You
have to have a certain need or curiosity to make it over that initial hurdle.
There's a similar problem with Common Lisp. Take this with a giant grain of salt because I am
far from an expert lisper, but the real unique power is not macros, or at least not
anymore.
The thing that is still unique to CL is how you can build the program is as you write
it[3]. Not write then test, but test as you write. One block at a
time, compiling each individual function and method with type checking.
Then you hear counter arguments, yes I can also reload a Python module in the REPL. Or XYZ
compiler is so fast that it achieves the same result of being immediate.
And yes, maybe it is the same when pitched in 30 seconds or less, but try it for some time,
build a couple things, and the difference is noticeable ...or maybe not, and that is fine too.
It's good to be concise, but elevator pitches are overrated.