Ever heard of This American Life? It's an amazing radio show that's free to listen to online. I learn a ton and it's always interesting!
I just listened to an extremely relevant episode about books that have changed people's lives. Listen to it if you have a chance!
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Amusing Ourselves to Death
Book #2: Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman
Run away from technology!
A 20 year old academic book on the problem of TV rings even more true today. Postman claims that everything in the public sphere (from education to politics) has evolved into a sort of show business, everything vying for our attention. I've read articles recently that are in tune to this idea: the attention economy, where there is so much information and things to watch, listen to, or read, that we're overwhelmed. Everything has to be entertaining, or skip it.
There is also an argument throughout the book that the tyrannical future predicted by one famous author has arrived. No, not 1984, but Brave New World
by Aldous Huxley. TV has turned politics into entertainment instead of a serious discussion. Advertisements are exciting and colorful, instead of convincing and logical. Postman states:
"Tyrants of all varieties have always known about the value of providing the masses with amusements as a means of pacifying discontent. But most of them could not have even hoped for a situation in which the masses would ignore that which does not amuse...How delighted would be all the kings, czars, and fuhrers of the past (and the commissars of the present) to know that censorship is not a necessity when all political discourse takes the form of jest" (141)
I think Postman has some really great points and his book prods what TV really does and how it affects us. I highly recommend his book, although it can be a bit dry at times (it is quite academic).
However, I think he has quite the glorified idea of what a human is. He says our attention span has been all but destroyed by television (and today, the internet with its many distractions), but was it ever that good? Here's a great article about attention and the internet. Also, he claims that ads no longer convince us through logic, but through showmanship. I don't think this is a new phenomenon. Haven't we always been convinced or tricked into buying something we absolutely didn't need with a little entertainment? I'm thinking of traveling caravans and Melquiades from One Hundred Years of Solitude. Perhaps buying stuff we don't need for no reason is just a part of being human.
Postman offers an excellent critique of television and its affect on the US. I just think some of the traits he criticizes has always been around. But maybe I'm just a cynic.
Run away from technology!
A 20 year old academic book on the problem of TV rings even more true today. Postman claims that everything in the public sphere (from education to politics) has evolved into a sort of show business, everything vying for our attention. I've read articles recently that are in tune to this idea: the attention economy, where there is so much information and things to watch, listen to, or read, that we're overwhelmed. Everything has to be entertaining, or skip it.
There is also an argument throughout the book that the tyrannical future predicted by one famous author has arrived. No, not 1984, but Brave New World
by Aldous Huxley. TV has turned politics into entertainment instead of a serious discussion. Advertisements are exciting and colorful, instead of convincing and logical. Postman states:"Tyrants of all varieties have always known about the value of providing the masses with amusements as a means of pacifying discontent. But most of them could not have even hoped for a situation in which the masses would ignore that which does not amuse...How delighted would be all the kings, czars, and fuhrers of the past (and the commissars of the present) to know that censorship is not a necessity when all political discourse takes the form of jest" (141)
I think Postman has some really great points and his book prods what TV really does and how it affects us. I highly recommend his book, although it can be a bit dry at times (it is quite academic).
However, I think he has quite the glorified idea of what a human is. He says our attention span has been all but destroyed by television (and today, the internet with its many distractions), but was it ever that good? Here's a great article about attention and the internet. Also, he claims that ads no longer convince us through logic, but through showmanship. I don't think this is a new phenomenon. Haven't we always been convinced or tricked into buying something we absolutely didn't need with a little entertainment? I'm thinking of traveling caravans and Melquiades from One Hundred Years of Solitude. Perhaps buying stuff we don't need for no reason is just a part of being human.
Postman offers an excellent critique of television and its affect on the US. I just think some of the traits he criticizes has always been around. But maybe I'm just a cynic.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
War is Hell
"The Collossus" Francisco de Goya
, Slaughterhouse-five
) are in the vein of "war is hell:" the ultimate message/moral of the story is that war is a terrible, terrible thing. I began thinking about this theme when watching Waltz With Bashir
, an animated film portraying the memories of the Lebanon War of 1982 from the perspective of filmmaker Ari Folman.One running theme of the movie was his participation in the Sabra and Shatila massacres. What he said in an interview disturbed me:
"I didn't take responsibility as an Israeli, in the film, for what happened. And frankly, I didn't feel responsible. I was a soldier; we were clueless. We didn't know what was happening until it ended. Then we knew. Of course the government was found guilty. They didn't send the troops in there, but they didn't stop it for three days. They could have stopped it. They could have reduced the casualties. They could have done something. They did not. But I didn't feel that I was a government representative who should take the blame for them. I couldn't care less about Ariel Sharon and his government. I have nothing to do with them, not then and most of all not now." (italics added)
He claims no responsibility for the massacre that happened right next to him. The Israeli army even provided flares to light the killings, which Folman stated he took part in. His army allowed for the slaughter to take place. Shouldn't some responsibility be felt?
Although his denial of responsibility doesn't appeal to me, I still highly recommend the film, as well as the two other books. Each offers a surrealist and unique approach to war and how it affects the common soldier. Do you have any "war is hell" books or movies you enjoy?
As for the question of responsibility and the common soldier: Are ordinary soldiers ever responsible for what their unit does? Should they feel responsible?
Friday, January 8, 2010
Confessions of an Economic Hitman
Book #1: "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
" by John Perkins
My brother recommended this book to me. It's the confessions of John Perkins, hired as an economist with the goal of getting developing countries to take out large loans, which were difficult to pay back and went straight into the pockets of large corporations, and thus the borrower countries were under the United States' thumb. If you have ever heard of the Washington Consensus (discussed in many a political science class), you're well aware of the practice of large loans to small countries.
The book isn't terribly well written, nor is the protagonist likable. He constantly complains about how depressed he is because he is involved in a system that prevents many from escaping poverty, as well as exploiting their natural resources. But then he takes a bribe to not talk about it. He feels bad again and once again, doesn't do anything about it. This tug-of-war about doing something/nothing makes up the last 3/5 of the book. The beginning explains his involvement and how it came about.
I don't recommend this book for its elegant prose; however, it is an interesting perspective on American foreign policy and what exactly the World Bank and similar international organizations stand for. Is there an American empire in the works? Perkins states that these heavy debts were designed to never be paid off and to force countries to bend to US will. An American empire doesn't seem too far fetched after reading his book. Is there a solution? He doesn't offer one besides 'tell your friends to read my book.' I guess I've done my part.
If you would like to learn more about American empire (a more counter culture perspective of US foreign policy), pick this up. However, you could just read the first half to get the point.
" by John PerkinsMy brother recommended this book to me. It's the confessions of John Perkins, hired as an economist with the goal of getting developing countries to take out large loans, which were difficult to pay back and went straight into the pockets of large corporations, and thus the borrower countries were under the United States' thumb. If you have ever heard of the Washington Consensus (discussed in many a political science class), you're well aware of the practice of large loans to small countries.
The book isn't terribly well written, nor is the protagonist likable. He constantly complains about how depressed he is because he is involved in a system that prevents many from escaping poverty, as well as exploiting their natural resources. But then he takes a bribe to not talk about it. He feels bad again and once again, doesn't do anything about it. This tug-of-war about doing something/nothing makes up the last 3/5 of the book. The beginning explains his involvement and how it came about.
I don't recommend this book for its elegant prose; however, it is an interesting perspective on American foreign policy and what exactly the World Bank and similar international organizations stand for. Is there an American empire in the works? Perkins states that these heavy debts were designed to never be paid off and to force countries to bend to US will. An American empire doesn't seem too far fetched after reading his book. Is there a solution? He doesn't offer one besides 'tell your friends to read my book.' I guess I've done my part.
If you would like to learn more about American empire (a more counter culture perspective of US foreign policy), pick this up. However, you could just read the first half to get the point.
Friday, January 1, 2010
Ring in the New Year - with books!
I've decided to read a book a week for my new year's resolution; not only that, but also to reflect on what I read. Inspired by a man who did the same and a woman who did a bit too much, I wanted to have a goal I had to keep for an entire year. Hopefully, having a blog will force me to keep up with my goal, as well as inspire a few discussions with friends.
Moving back home, graduating college, and a break-up forced me to reconsider what's important to me. I hope to gain something from this year and take the time to document and learn from each book I read.
Now, any recommendations?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
