I've had an itch to read this book for years but hadn't quite made a commitment to do it until recently reading some work by Annie Ernaux and Edouard I've had an itch to read this book for years but hadn't quite made a commitment to do it until recently reading some work by Annie Ernaux and Edouard Louis, because both of these authors of literary memoir or 'Autofiction' are explicitly influenced by this book. They are both French writers from poor, provincial working class backgrounds, who have risen to the top of the French literary scene through their talents, and both have a sociological focus upon the French class system. I had been feeling compelled to read this book because I have been thinking a lot about class myself in recent years.
My political views have evolved over the past few years from being generally Left Wing and Liberal, through being a Social Democrat, a Democratic Socialist, to ending up a Marxist. As I have been on this political journey my understanding of class has evolved from a socio-cultural understanding towards a materialist understanding of class. But, as I have been thinking and reflecting it has become more and more apparent that as much as I believe that a materialist understanding of class is the 'correct' one, the wider public more often than not don't think that way. This is a major problem for people on the Left who want to transform society. People who earn a lot of money or own assets think of themselves as Working Class and people who don't earn much and don't own assets think of themselves as middle class. The establishment foster and encourage this understanding with the aid of the education system and the media, but we cannot deny that it is how people think. Now, I think that people are mostly misguided about all this, but it isn't just 'false consciousness' as Marxists would have it. Socio-cultural matters do, in fact, matter, and they are sometimes in conflict with materialism.
Reading this book has helped to clarify and illuminate part of my own personal history. I grew up in a working class family who come from generations of working class poverty on both sides. My Dad was a soldier and I grew up on army bases until by parents split up when I was 11, and my sister and I moved with our Mum into a council house on a very poor council estate in the neighbourhood with the highest murder rate in Western Europe. I went to a state comprehensive school in the most muti-cultural area in Europe, in which white British kids were a tiny minority, and spent my spare time hanging out in various council estates. We were penniless. Now, despite all this I managed to get enough GCSE's to go into 6th Form and got enough A Levels to get into University and then managed to get away from this background and start working in the book industry. And bizarrely, I didn't know what class I belonged to. Despite coming from the poorest, most disadvantaged background possible, from unbroken generations of working class poverty, I wasn't sure I was working class because I liked reading, and art, and the theatre, and I wasn't interested in football. After leaving the estate I studied English Literature at university, ended up working in the book industry and then a major art institution, and ended up moving mainly in cultured and educated middle-class circles. It was the experience of my social ascent ending and being hit in the face with economic reality that helped me to become more politicised as I moved into worse paid, more precarious work.
The last few years of my political activity and study mean I have been reflecting, considering and analysing class dialectically. The experience of knocking on people's doors for the Labour Party under Corbyn has given me a lot to think about. Speaking to well-to-do retirees who have done well for themselves and who own a nice house outright, reacting with vehement antagonism when you try to speak to them about bringing in some Social Democratic policies is very enlightening. People who came from working class backgrounds and did pretty well for themselves often turn into selfish reactionaries when it is in their own economic interest to do so, even if the only reason they were ever in a position to 'do well' is because they grew up under the Keynesian consensus, were able to go a Grammar School, attend university for free, get a well paid job with great conditions because of the power of the labour movement, buy a house for a fraction of the cost that it is today, raise children under generous social welfare programmes with the help of a functioning and well funded NHS, and are now enjoying retirement under fat pensions that we will never have access to. They don't understand that they are living the life of riley because of the kind of social democratic policies that they now fight against with all of their being, and they don't understand that they are no longer 'working class', and that a student or barista who tries to speak to them about these things in a well educated accent is not 'better off' than they are.
Bourdieu analyses French society in all it's minute class divisions with fine 'distinction'. Obviously some of what he has to say is specific to French society in the 60's and 70s', but a lot of it stands today in 2020's Britain. This book is over 500 pages long and it is pretty academic and dry so if you aren't committed to reading it you will find it to be a slog, so I wouldn't bother unless the subject matter really interests you. I don't agree with some of the other reviewers who say that it is very difficult to read, or written in a very complex way though. He isn't anywhere near as difficult to read as some of his contemporaries like Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, Deleuze etc... He doesn't write in a way that is deliberately obtuse, he is simply writing like a French academic at the top of his field and that's always going to be a bit difficult to read. ...more
Last year I had not heard of Annie Ernaux. Then I began to manage a new bookshop and we got in a range of books from independent publishers. I noticedLast year I had not heard of Annie Ernaux. Then I began to manage a new bookshop and we got in a range of books from independent publishers. I noticed that Fitzcarraldo seemed to be especially good and have a very high reputation. I had never read any of their books, despite having Second Hand Time by Svetlana Alexievich on my book shelves for years (I still haven't read it yet). Drive Your Plow Over the Bones of the Dead by Olga Tokarczuk is one of our bestselling books, so I read that to see what the fuss was all about, and thought it was great. We were asked to host an event with Joshua Cohen for his book The Netenyahus, so we did, and I thought that novel was great, and it went on to win the Pulitzer Prize the next year. Then they asked if we would host an event for Daisy Hildyard for Emergency, so we did, and I thought it was another excellent novel. But we have more books by Annie Ernaux from Fitzcarraldo then any other writer, and she seems to have a fanbase that consists mostly of intelligent young women, so I picked up The Years a couple of months ago. Just as I decided it was time to read it Ernaux won the Nobel Prize.
This is the best Fitzcarraldo book I have read yet, and I think it's one of the best books of the 21st Century so far. It is a marvellous book, blending together autobiography, history and sociology in a very literary style. Ernaux reveals and crafts the sweep of her life, from being born into a relatively poor provincial family during WW2, through the social, political and material transformations that took place in French society in the decades that follow as she experiences the youth rebellion of the 50' and 60's, ascends into the bourgeoise, becomes a teacher, a wife and mother, experiences the revolutionary moment of May 68, and the political disappointment and cynicism that follows in the subsequent decades.
I cannot do the book justice with this description. I think it is one of the essential books of the 21st century. I can't think of a British writer operating at this level. And we should be very thankful to Fitzcarraldo for bringing the best literature in the world into being, and into English. ...more
This is a great little book that I really recommend everyone vaguely on the Left reads. Erik Olin Wright was a very influential Marxist Sociologist foThis is a great little book that I really recommend everyone vaguely on the Left reads. Erik Olin Wright was a very influential Marxist Sociologist for decades, and he compressed the breadth of his learning and experience into this brief book, designed for a popular readership and for use by activists, before discovering he had terminal leukaemia and dying as he finished it. It is meant as a theoretical and practical guide for activists from across the broad Left for strategies to help to mitigate, resist and overcome Capitalism.
Although he comes from the Marxist tradition, Marxists would find lots to disagree with him about. He presents a series of ways of being an anticapitalist, including a Marxist revolution, Democratic Socialism, Social Democracy, Anarchism, and building Cooperatives, and he rules Revolution out as a strategy worth pursuing because it ends up causing too much damage. He comes from the Analytical Marxist tradition, and apparently many of the people who were part of this tradition ended up leaving Marxism behind altogether. I was in a pub with a group of Anarchists a couple of days ago, and they claimed Wright as an Anarchist.
I think your reaction to this book depends heavily on what your background is, and what reading you have done before. I was reading this in Liverpool at The World Transformed, and Wendy Liu (author of Abolish Silicon Valley) saw it poking out of my pocket, and remarked on me reading it. I asked if it was good, and she said it was but it was pretty basic, but would be a good book to recommend to someone just learning about the Left. Having come to this book after reading lots of books by Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Luxemburg, Miliband and others, I could see lots of objections to the content that he just passes over without mentioning. Wright is advocating Reformism, and dismissing Revolution. But this is a debate that's been going on for over 150 years, and many people have very clear ideas about why Reformism is impossible. Wright doesn't deal with these critiques. However, as a Marxist I do have to accept that a Revolution doesn't appear to be on the horizon under present conditions, and Marx's schematic of a society increasingly polarised between two classes isn't exactly how history has developed.
Wright is making arguments about how we challenge and overcome Capitalism in the here and now. However, it is obvious that he is talking about how we deal with it in the advanced economies of the West, and doesn't have much to say about the situation elsewhere in the world. When he dismisses the Russian and Chinese revolutions as authoritarian, he ignores the fact that they have provided an alternative to the Capitalist West which has provided intellectual and material support for Socialist, Revolutionary and Decolonial movements across the world, and the fact that anticapitalist and anticolonial struggles are infinitely weaker now. When he describes the success of the postwar Social Democratic order in Europe, he ignores the fact that, for example, the 1945 Labour government that built the NHS, social housing, radically improved educational opportunities and social mobility, did so on the basis of ongoing support for Imperialism, and by robbing the global South.
I know that Wright obviously knows all of this, and I assume that he is leaving it all out because he was writing a simplified book aimed mainly at activists in the USA and Europe. I also think that his focus upon gradual, evolutionary change leaves aside the question of immanent climate collapse. Regardless of my reservations I do think this is a book very well worth reading for anyone on the left, whatever your level of background knowledge and experience is. ...more
An interesting and brief introduction to what anarchism is through showing what it would mean in practice across a number of different fields, from arAn interesting and brief introduction to what anarchism is through showing what it would mean in practice across a number of different fields, from architecture, to education, to mental health services, the workplace and prison. It provides an interesting provocation and I think it's well worth reading, even if you aren't an anarchist....more
Reading Graeber is always enjoyable, but this time because I have done a lot more reading in political theory it is more obvious to me that he is writReading Graeber is always enjoyable, but this time because I have done a lot more reading in political theory it is more obvious to me that he is writing very much from an Anarchist perspective, and you need to take everything he is saying with a pinch of salt. I can now recognise that all his writing is designed to question the assumptions of liberal democracy and capitalism, but also socialism and Marxism, and if you aren't well informed about these ideologies you might not realise what's happening. I'm a Marxist, but I'm not a fundamentalist and I think that writers and thinkers from other traditions and ideologies can have valuable things to say.
Graeber's thesis is that, contrary to the unexamined faith that Capitalists have that their system is the most efficient and that markets cut waste, in fact their has been an enormous growth in unnecessary and pointless bullshit jobs. Graeber put forward this notion in an essay for a small Anarchist magazine and it ended up going viral and kicking off a huge amount of discussion around the world, as people said they recognised what he was saying. Lots of people, particularly in fields like services, law, accounting, marketing etc... feel like their jobs are bullshit, they contribute nothing towards society, nobody would notice or care if the jobs wasn't being done, and as much as they hate doing them they have to continue to do so because its the only way they can make a living. Jobs that have an obvious, direct benefit to society, like teaching or cleaning or caring or nursing, tend to be poorly paid. It's as if people who's job is of obvious necessity and benefit to society have to be punished for it.
This is the opposite of what is supposed to happen. Under Capitalism and markets everything is supposed to run with the greatest possible efficiency. People say that the state generates waste and bureaucracy, and creates unnecessary jobs, and that's why the state should be minimalised to allow the efficiency of the private sector to allocate resources most effectively. Graeber demonstrates that this is not true, and that in fact the number of paper pushers and bureaucrats that there are in the labour force has hugely increased under Capitalism. He thinks this is for political and ideological reasons, to force people into work that doesn't need to be done, to keep them quiescent and obedient and stop people from having the time, freedom and imagination to conceive of a better world. His theory is aimed at taking down some of our unexamined assumptions, and it is also taking aim at the idea that socialists and trade unionists tend to hold about the inherent necessity and dignity of work, and the primacy of our identity as 'workers'.
Graeber is a playful, imaginative and creative thinker. He doesn't confine himself to conventional thinking, and that's why he can be such an interesting and thought provoking writer. I do think that this means that his writing can be quite unsystematic, and can tend to over emphasise the importance of some minor issues and ideas in order to break with convention and go against the grain. As long as you read him with an understanding of that in your mind I think there's a lot to be gained from reading him. His work actually reminds me of stuff I read years ago before I was politically enlightened, like Malcolm Gladwell or the Freakonomics guys. Thought provoking ideas presented in a fun, digestible, readable format that makes you feel clever as you read it; the difference being that Graeber is actually very good and those other guys are actually idiots. ...more
I remember reading the reviews of this book when it came out and thinking I should read it. I have eventually got around to it a decade later. I thinkI remember reading the reviews of this book when it came out and thinking I should read it. I have eventually got around to it a decade later. I think what the book does is very important, but I didn't really need to read more than a summary of it because I already agree with everything they are saying. The value is that it backs up all of their arguments with hard data that can't be argued with. Like the Thomas Picketty book Capital in the 21st Century the only really strong argument I can see for reading it is if you are a social scientist who needs to be persuaded by the strength of their research. It's interesting to recall the response it generated at the time, with people like Michael Gove and David Cameron pretending they were paying attention to it and not doing anything at all to follow it's conclusions. The same thing happened with Thomas Picketty's book, in which he proved conclusively that the economy was unfair and unsustainable, that all the wealth would continue to accrue to the already wealthy in our current system and that massive redistribution was necessary. Facts are always crowded out by ideology. ...more
A five star masterpiece. Started reading on Saturday and finished on Tuesday night. Everything Miliband writes here rings true, and it is extremely weA five star masterpiece. Started reading on Saturday and finished on Tuesday night. Everything Miliband writes here rings true, and it is extremely well written. Miliband analyses the state in developed economies under late capitalism, contrasting his Marxist interpretation with the Liberal interpretation of the Bourgeoise Democratic state. He demonstrates that everything that constitutes the state, and all the most powerful forces within it, are inherently biased towards maintaining the status quo, Capitalism and Conservatism, whoever is in office. Even if a 'Left' wing party get into Government they are stymied by the fact that the civil service, the military, the banks, the media, the church, the education system and more are ideologically alligned to conservatism and capitalism. Even the social democratic and socialist parties and the trade unions are forced to prop up the system they are theoretically supposed to oppose by the immense weight of these forces. Reading this in the aftermath of the General Election we have just been through shows how brilliant and correct Miliband's analysis is. I cannot believe he wrote this in 1969, because everything that just happened conforms perfectly with his theory. I wish everyone would read this book, it is essential reading. ...more
A book that has kick-started a lot of discussion and thinking on the Left. Originally published in 2015, as I was reading it I had a sense of recognizA book that has kick-started a lot of discussion and thinking on the Left. Originally published in 2015, as I was reading it I had a sense of recognizing actions and strategies recommended in this book as things I was witnessing or engaging in today. They have added an afterword for the paperback edition released in 2016 in which they point towards the surprising and positive development of the rise of Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders. The authors open with a critique of what they call 'folk politics' on the Left, which I agree with whole-heartedly. The Left has become less and less ambitious and effective over the last few decades, retreating increasingly into small scale actions, temporary and unscalable actions like Occupy and turning towards primitivism. Srnicek and Williams argue that the Left needs to build a positive vision for the future and embraces progress, modernity, technology and Utopian thinking, as they used to before becoming so cowed by Capitalism. A form of politics predicated upon convincing the masses that they should embrace a simpler lifestyle with far less consumption and a return to pre-modern values and conditions is simply not going to work. A form of politics that seeks a return to the Keynesian, Fordist system of the post-war era is also a dead end. The authors argue that what we need is a truly radical vision of the future with populist mass appeal, based upon entering a post-work society with increased automation and a universal citizens income allowing people the freedom to live really liberated, creative lives free from the everyday coercion and discipline we suffer under an exhausted and discredited Neo Liberal order. I'm not going to get into a developed review of the book because there are plenty of them available, but an example of the kind of thing they are proposing that comes to my mind (and isn't in the book) that seems practical and immanent to me is the state of British high streets. High street shops are going out of business at an unprecedented rate for a number of reasons, including declining incomes and competition from online retailers who have huge competitive advantages and who pay for less tax. A town or neighbourhood without a vibrant high street is incredibly depressing and is one of the primary ways that people are experiencing the gradual downfall of Capitalism in their everyday lives. The folk political response to this would be to fight back against this by calling for lower business rates, tax crack downs on online retailers, and trying to persuade people through guilt to shop locally and support independent businesses, despite the fact that the products may not be what consumers want and that it will be much more expensive and less convenient. Whenever I'm in one of these towns, looking in the shops at locally made fudge, ceramics and expensive handmade clothes I am reminded that I don't want any of these products, and I don't have the disposable income to buy them even if I did. The reason people make these appeals is partly down to an impulse to retain high streets as a space for socializing, engaging with other people in your community and preventing us all from becoming so lonely and atomized. Instead I would suggest that we face up to the inevitable fact that high street shopping will continue to decline because it cannot compete with the efficiency of online retail, and we should re-think what our town centres, high streets and public spaces are for. We should be encouraging those spaces to be used for functions outside the marketplace and turning them into art galleries, skate parks, community theaters, cafes, exercise spaces, gardens, workshops and music studios, so that we can revitalize these spaces and provide communities with the resources and opportunities to reuse them for non economic activity. As the number of people who are thrown into becoming surplus to industry and the economy increases we are going to need other ways to spend our time and use our spaces, and this seems better than allowing the gradual decline of the high street as they become full of boarded up properties, betting shops, pound shops and charity shops, and people who aren't working spend their time isolated at home as there is very little you can do without money. Any form of action that is predicated upon consumers behaving virtuously, against their own basic material interests, is never going to work. We need to be offering a radical alternative rather than a nostalgic and impractical vision of a return to an imagined time when things were better. This is also the reason I think that any form of Green politics that isn't also tied to a radical visions of politics is utterly useless. Without a radical Leftist vision of the restructuring of politics, economics and society it is destined to be nothing more than a fringe interest for the well meaning and ineffectual bourgeoisie, who will never be able to win over enough people to their cause to do anything to resist the ecological catastrophe we are walking into. I would really like to read a book on the environment that recognizes this and has some practical suggestions about how to overcome it (any suggestions would be appreciated). ...more
I read this maybe a couple of years ago and must have forgotten to put up a review of it. I recall quite enjoying it. I remember thinking the critiqueI read this maybe a couple of years ago and must have forgotten to put up a review of it. I recall quite enjoying it. I remember thinking the critique Nagle was making of the contemporary Left was pretty valid. However, I get the impression over the past couple of years she has slid into the cohort of 'post-Left' cranks and the value of her criticisms of the modern left has diminished. Adolph Reed Jnr indicated recently that she has joined the circle of critics of the Left that the Right love to platform. When that happens to you it's a bad sign. ...more
A slighter book than Debt, but similarly witty, thought provoking and original. Graeber points out that whilst bureaucracy is always depicted as sometA slighter book than Debt, but similarly witty, thought provoking and original. Graeber points out that whilst bureaucracy is always depicted as something the sluggish government imposes upon sexy, innovative businesses, in fact the enormous growth in bureaucracy over the last few decades has been driven by businesses. The practices and methods used by the finance sector have been adopted by all kinds of other workplaces and industries and this has been the primary reason that more and more of everyone's time is spent doing paperwork and administration and jumping through bureaucratic hoops. He also argues that despite the fact that people complain about bureaucracy there's a part of them that secretly likes it because it makes life a little more orderly, predictable and comprehensible knowing that there are some sort of 'rules' to this 'game'. A world without bureaucracy would be a bit more free, arbitrary and anarchic.
This book is well worth reading, and I'm going to go ahead and assume that in fact all of Graeber's writing is worth reading....more
A brilliant book. Owen Jones is probably the most inspiring figure in the British Left today. He absolutely nails the social and political changes thaA brilliant book. Owen Jones is probably the most inspiring figure in the British Left today. He absolutely nails the social and political changes that have taken place in this country over the last 35 years that have lead to a massive decline in the living standards, communities and levels of basic respect afforded the working class in the UK. They have been victimised, ignored and mocked for too long and now we're beginning to see the consequences with the rise of UKIP. I read this book in a state of gradually rising fury. Most of all I'm angry with the Labour party, who have utterly failed as a left wing party that is supposed to represent the interests of the working class. Today Ed Milliband has announced that one of his policies will be reducing the level of benefits young people can claim. Well done Ed. You're doing a great job of continuing the grand tradition of marginalising and victimising the poorest, most vulnerable members of our society. ...more
Excellent diagnosis of the impact of the internet upon modern civilisation. A lot of people, myself included, have developed concerns about the effectExcellent diagnosis of the impact of the internet upon modern civilisation. A lot of people, myself included, have developed concerns about the effect of being online all the time, and this book pulls together the research and arguments to clarify what is happening to us and why it is a cause for concern.
Carr argues that we are going through a revolution in human consciousness and entering a post-literate age and that feels right to me. He draws upon the work of Marshal Mcluhan as well as recent scientific research to demonstrate the effect of different forms of media on the human brain, and shows that our brains are actually being remoulded by extensive exposure to the net. He looks at the historical impact that developments such as the invention of writing, accurate maps and modern clocks and watches had upon us, and most significantly discusses what a revolution in human consciousness the invention of the Gutenberg Press and cheap and easy access to books created. Post-Gutenberg Europeans were the in many significant ways the product of books and a literary culture, which seeped into miriad aspects of life. Today this model of human consciousness is being supplanted by a new kind of person, a new model of being.
The book flavoured culture we are currently evolving out of encouraged deep engagement, long term thinking, a weighing up of different points of view to come to your own conclusions, individuality, idiosyncrasy, depth etc... The internet flavoured culture we are entering encourages breadth over depth, constant stimulation over contemplation, a flattening out of differences and idiosyncrasies and a reduction in personal knowledge. We have access to far more information, data and content than ever before but this avalanche of information is overwhelming us, and we are abdicating our need to retain hold personal knowledge or skills in our heads in favour of outsourcing it to the internet, treating it as a mental external hard drive. Neuroscientific and psychological studies show that it doesn't work the way we think it does. In fact abandoning the need to know and recall things ourselves in favour of accessing this information online doesn't free up mental space for us to use differently, but in fact just leaves those parts of the mind we would have used dormant, reducing the amount of our brains we use.
The problem is this book diagnoses an issue which seems irreversible. I suppose it is a warning about what we are entering and a swansong for what we are losing. The author originally decided to write this book after noticing that he found it increasingly difficult to concentrate for long enough to read a book or long article, or focus upon writing. His brain had become accustomed to the constant stimulation and distraction of being online, and wondered how the mentality of a grown man could be so altered. I have noticed the same thing happening to me. I have read voraciously for most of my life but I have noticed that I find it much harder to concentrate than I used to. There are books I have read before which I imagine I would really struggle with today.
As Carr acknowledges the internet is an amazing medium which brings huge benefits to us. He isn't a luddite and doesn't think there is any chance we are going to give up this technology, but he is trying to make us aware of what we are losing in the process. ...more
Not bad, but not great. It's an engaging enough narrative, and Sudhir is worthy of our respect, but it's a bit short and simple. I suspect this may beNot bad, but not great. It's an engaging enough narrative, and Sudhir is worthy of our respect, but it's a bit short and simple. I suspect this may be because his publishers were hoping to attract the 'Freakonomics' fan base, but it ended up watering down and simplifying what he had to say.
Ir was interesting to find out what major drug dealers actually earn and what the pay scale is through the gang hierarchy. Otherwise there isn't much here you wouldn't pick up in a much more in depth and impressive fashion from watching The Wire or reading The Corner by David Simon, which is an absolute masterpiece. But then David Simon is completely unafraid of demanding his readers or viewers meet his standards rather than pandering to our short attention spans and lack of seriousness....more
Raymond Aron was famous in his heyday. Amongst other things he was known as 'The Professor' of France and he was Sartre's main intellectual opponent. Raymond Aron was famous in his heyday. Amongst other things he was known as 'The Professor' of France and he was Sartre's main intellectual opponent. He deserves to be better known and more widely read today. I picked these books up in a charity shop after reading admiring referrences to him in Postwar and Reappraisals by Tony Judt and Cultural Amnesia by Clive James, and I was not disappointed. He writes in a clear, bold, opinionated but reasonable style that seems to have all but disappeared amongst French cultural figures, especially those most prominant in the English speaking world. When reading him I had the agreeable sensation that I had discovered a civilized, neglected, authoratative and educative writer of genius. I will definitely try to find more of his books. He has also picqued by interest in Max Weber....more
Loading...
