I’m less and less interested in writing or reading hot takes. Even though insta-commentary has long been the engine of the internet and fuel for the media industry’s financial sustainability, the hot-take’s value to society is largely negative. “Fools rush in” is as true in hasty internet discourse as it is in swoony romance. Wise people pause. They consider. They ask questions: Is my quick reading of this accurate or helpful? Can the meaning and significance of a thing be sufficiently known—or responsibly argued—with so little time?

Helpful analysis takes time. It needs space to percolate. The test of time turns out to be a valuable test. That’s why I’m much more interested in “cooler takes” that make sense of cultural events or “news” after a bit more time and reflective space. The pace of culture is relentlessly fast. Understanding it well takes time.

One example of a cooler take is my recent attempt to make sense of two events in Paris last year, and how they might help us make sense of a vibe shift underway in Western culture. Tons of hot-take ink was spilled in the days immediately following the Paris Olympics opening ceremony. But six months later, what lingers as the most meaningful moment from that ceremony is not what everyone debated in the immediate aftermath.

That’s so often the case. Hot takes get clicks, shares, and generate heat. Cooler takes actually make sense of things. They generate light.