Response to the glittery naked san franciso man (article)

(First of all, I apologize in advance if this post is not very clear - I was in GW's engineering building from 7 pm until around 8 am today. ):  )

My first impression of the essay was that it was neither like the opinion piece in which section I remember it belonging in - or rather, a news article from The NY Times - nor like an essay which I am familiar with - it more resembles Montaigne's definition of an essay as "a try", and more in line with his meandering, thought provoking and thought-jumping style. I personally like that type of style, as it gives an insight into the writer's state of mind and train of thought. This is particularly related because I have an interest in the human mind, although not enough of one to pursue a serious degree in its study. Although in this essay the subjects seem to hop around, it does achieve what his goal was, in my opinion, which was to simulate a walk in San Francisco. Onto the subjects of the essay - the naked man was ab it jarring at first, but like most intros in thoughtful essays, they lead to other profound things. I really appreciated how he began with a naked man reference and expanded on it, and how he concluded with a naked man reference - a revelation or extra detail, if you will. Rather than adding to just the description of the naked man and what he represents, the glitter ties up the entire essay and all of its ideas in a unique and satisfying manner.