- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
Most Helpful Favorable Review
14 out of 21 people found this review helpful.
the "Tom Wolfe" reviewer also uses the word "obviously", without backing his assertions up with any amount of proof or argument whatsoever. i found this to be another example of the absolutely obvious nature of the reviewer's self-righteousness.
the statistics and conclusions in this book are incredibly rational with subjective nuances about human nature in tact. i will leave the potential reader with one example that does not necessarily require statistics or more proof than we've all seen with our own eyes: Murray comes to the conclusion that children brought up (gasp!) in two-parent homes do better in life.
Murray also brings up several points regarding the pursuit of happiness as it was originally intented in what he calls "the American Project". in so doing, he uses basic definitions of happiness as opposed to "unhinged hedonism" some may associate with happiness in modern times.
the book brings up excellent points about how culture is affecting destructive or what he calls "unseemly" behavior that results from a society with less codes of honor or morals. one such example he provides is an "unseemly" severence package for a failed CEO. Murray points out that these packages are NOT illegal but are morally reprehensible. in other words, Murray concludes that a society that loses it's moral bearings erodes itself from the inside.
even if one disagrees with Murray's conclusion(s), it will provide the reader with a facinating read for those interested in the social sciences, or even human nature in general. [one can preview Murray's presentation and summary of the book on booktv's website - i believe only the elite would find Charles Murray "self-absorbed" because they can never admit they are wrong or argue on topic]
posted by FrontPorchReview on February 20, 2012Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Most Helpful Critical Review
9 out of 40 people found this review helpful.
stats right conclusions wrong; as usual
Read it for the statistics. Read it for the unintentional exposure of how people like Mr. Murrey think. But, despite the subtitle, do not take it seriously as a true sociology report. It is not. His premise that the 'new rich' have isolated themselves to the point they do not understand what goes on outside their "bubble" is true. Obviously he has.
posted by 2145 on February 4, 2012Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Posted April 1, 2012
Reads like a textbook
I read this book on the recommendation of my father-in-law so we could discuss it. While I did find it interesting, it read like a high school or college sociology textbook. I do not recommend it for Nook as the line graphs are hard to read and he refers to them often and it is hard to find them again.
9 out of 9 people found this review helpful.Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Posted April 9, 2012
Charles Murray describes the collapse of the white American wor
Charles Murray describes the collapse of the white American working class since the early 1960's and the rise of a segregated and self absorbed upper middle class. He presents two hypothetical towns that he names Belmont and Fishtown. Murray uses many impressive graphs to describe the divergence of values between rich and poor of the two hypothetical towns.
Murray asserts that the lower classes in particular, have grown less virtuous, industrious, responsible, religious or community spirited. The upper classes, according to Murray, do much better according to his standards. The author criticizes the upper class for its lack of interaction or involvement with the lower classes. He uses some thought provoking examples to support his position. For example, the rise of children out of wedlock among never married working class parents has depressing implications for society.
Despite his quantitative format, the author sweeps aside intervening variables that are not consistent with his view of the world. Other inconvenient variables are mentioned, but otherwise ignored. Murray regards America as a less virtuous place than in 1963, when we had Jim Crow oppression of minority people in large parts of the country. But by focusing only on white people, he can easily avoid this issue.
Murray’s solution is to return to the days when everyone fended for themselves, which seems ironic. The author reveals social trends that might surprise anyone who has not been in a VFW hall, but look carefully for the intervening variables that he ignores or discounts in order to meet his world view.
3 out of 6 people found this review helpful.Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Posted July 12, 2012
Interesting, but Long
My thoughts- This book was interesting, but I think that 300 pages for the main text was too long. It could have been shorter and gotten to the point faster.
I have never thought that the census was that important and asked a lot of personal questions that it didn’t need to. This book showed me how important the census is and what kind of information can be gotten from it. Without this information there would be no book.
I thought the last chapter was the best, because it was no longer about numbers and it talked about Charles Murray’s opinion and where the United States will be in the future. We can already see in Europe what happens when heritage is forgotten. As a country we need to get back to our founding fathers’ virtues, so that we can have a strong future without such a strong separation between classes.
I recommend this book to those who want to learn how America is coming apart culturally.
Disclosure of Material Connection- I received Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010 by Charles Murray for free from the WaterBrook Multnomah “Blogging For Books” program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.
1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Posted September 30, 2012
No text was provided for this review.
Posted October 15, 2013
No text was provided for this review.