A NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER
Americans are a "positive" people cheerful, optimistic, and upbeat: This is our reputation as well as our self-image. But more than a temperament, being positive is the key to getting success and prosperity. Or so we are told.
In this utterly original debunking, Barbara Ehrenreich confronts the false promises of positive thinking and shows its reach into every corner of American life, from Evangelical megachurches to the medical establishment, and, worst of all, to the business community, where the refusal to consider negative outcomeslike mortgage defaultscontributed directly to the current economic disaster. With the myth-busting powers for which she is acclaimed, Ehrenreich exposes the downside of positive thinking: personal self-blame and national denial. This is Ehrenreich at her provocative bestpoking holes in conventional wisdom and faux science and ending with a call for existential clarity and courage.
|Edition description:||First Edition|
|Product dimensions:||5.72(w) x 11.06(h) x 0.68(d)|
About the Author
Barbara Ehrenreich is the bestselling author of many books, including Nickel and Dimed, Bait and Switch, Bright-sided, This Land Is Their Land, Dancing In The Streets and Blood Rites. A frequent contributor to Harper's and The Nation, she has also been a columnist at The New York Times and Time magazine.
Read an Excerpt
By Ehrenreich, Barbara
PicadorCopyright © 2010 Ehrenreich, Barbara
All right reserved.
Americans are a "positive" people. This is our reputation as well as our self-image. We smile a lot and are oft en baffled when people from other cultures do not return the favor. In the well-worn stereotype, we are upbeat, cheerful, optimistic, and shallow, while foreigners are likely to be subtle, world-weary, and possibly decadent. American expatriate writers like Henry James and James Baldwin wrestled with and occasionally reinforced this stereotype, which I once encountered in the 1980s in the form of a remark by Soviet émigré poet Joseph Brodsky to the effect that the problem with Americans is that they have "never known suffering." (Apparently he didn’t know who had invented the blues.) Whether we Americans see it as an embarrassment or a point of pride, being positive—in affect, in mood, in outlook—seems to be engrained in our national character.
Who would be churlish or disaffected enough to challenge these happy features of the American personality? Take the business of positive "affect," which refers to the mood we display to others through our smiles, our greetings, our professions of confidence and optimism. Scientists have found that the mere act of smiling can generate positive feelings within us, at least if the smile is not forced. In addition, good feelings, as expressed through our words and smiles, seem to be contagious: "Smile and the world smiles with you." Surely the world would be a better, happier place if we all greeted one another warmly and stopped to coax smiles from babies—if only through the well-known social psychological mechanism of "mood contagion." Recent studies show that happy feelings flit easily through social networks, so that one person’s good fortune can brighten the day even for only distantly connected others.1
Furthermore, psychologists today agree that positive feelings like gratitude, contentment, and self-confidence can actually lengthen our lives and improve our health. Some of these claims are exaggerated, as we shall see, though positive feelings hardly need to be justified, like exercise or vitamin supplements, as part of a healthy lifestyle. People who report having positive feelings are more likely to participate in a rich social life, and vice versa, and social connectedness turns out to be an important defense against depression, which is a known risk factor for many physical illnesses. At the risk of redundancy or even tautology, we can say that on many levels, individual and social, it is good to be "positive," certainly better than being withdrawn, aggrieved, or chronically sad.
So I take it as a sign of progress that, in just the last decade or so, economists have begun to show an interest in using happiness rather than just the gross national product as a measure of an economy’s success. Happiness is, of course, a slippery thing to measure or define. Philosophers have debated what it is for centuries, and even if we were to define it simply as a greater frequency of positive feelings than negative ones, when we ask people if they are happy we are asking them to arrive at some sort of average over many moods and moments. Maybe I was upset earlier in the day but then was cheered up by a bit of good news, so what am I really? In one well-known psychological experiment, subjects were asked to answer a questionnaire on life satisfaction—but only after they had performed the apparently irrelevant task of photocopying a sheet of paper for the experimenter. For a randomly chosen half of the subjects, a dime had been left for them to find on the copy machine. As two economists summarize the results, "Reported satisfaction with life was raised substantially by the discovery of the coin on the copy machine—clearly not an income effect."2
In addition to the problems of measurement, there are cultural differences in how happiness is regarded and whether it is even seen as a virtue. Some cultures, like our own, value the positive affect that seems to signal internal happiness; others are more impressed by seriousness, self-sacrifice, or a quiet willingness to cooperate. However hard to pin down, though, happiness is somehow a more pertinent metric for well-being, from a humanistic perspective, than the buzz of transactions that constitute the GDP.
Surprisingly, when psychologists undertake to measure the relative happiness of nations, they routinely find that Americans are not, even in prosperous times and despite our vaunted positivity, very happy at all. A recent meta-analysis of over a hundred studies of self-reported happiness worldwide found Americans ranking only twenty-third, surpassed by the Dutch, the Danes, the Malaysians, the Bahamians, the Austrians, and even the supposedly dour Finns.3 In another potential sign of relative distress, Americans account for two-thirds of the global market for antidepressants, which happen also to be the most commonly prescribed drugs in the United States. To my knowledge, no one knows how antidepressant use affects people’s responses to happiness surveys: do respondents report being happy because the drugs make them feel happy or do they report being unhappy because they know they are dependent on drugs to make them feel better? Without our heavy use of antidepressants, Americans would likely rank far lower in the happiness rankings than we currently do.
When economists attempt to rank nations more objectively in terms of "well-being," taking into account such factors as health, environmental sustainability, and the possibility of upward mobility, the United States does even more poorly than it does when only the subjective state of "happiness" is measured. The Happy Planet Index, to give just one example, locates us at 150th among the world’s nations.4
How can we be so surpassingly "positive" in self-image and stereotype without being the world’s happiest and best-off people? The answer, I think, is that positivity is not so much our condition or our mood as it is part of our ideology—the way we explain the world and think we ought to function within it. That ideology is "positive thinking," by which we usually mean two things. One is the generic content of positive thinking—that is, the positive thought itself—which can be summarized as: Things are pretty good right now, at least if you are willing to see silver linings, make lemonade out of lemons, etc., and things are going to get a whole lot better. This is optimism, and it is not the same as hope. Hope is an emotion, a yearning, the experience of which is not entirely within our control. Optimism is a cognitive stance, a conscious expectation, which presumably anyone can develop through practice.
The second thing we mean by "positive thinking" is this practice, or discipline, of trying to think in a positive way. There is, we are told, a practical reason for undertaking this effort: positive thinking supposedly not only makes us feel optimistic but actually makes happy outcomes more likely. If you expect things to get better, they will. How can the mere process of thinking do this? In the rational explanation that many psychologists would offer today, optimism improves health, personal efficacy, confidence, and resilience, making it easier for us to accomplish our goals. A far less rational theory also runs rampant in American ideology—the idea that our thoughts can, in some mysterious way, directly affect the physical world. Negative thoughts somehow produce negative outcomes, while positive thoughts realize themselves in the form of health, prosperity, and success. For both rational and mystical reasons, then, the effort of positive thinking is said to be well worth our time and attention, whether this means reading the relevant books, attending seminars and speeches that offer the appropriate mental training,
Excerpted from Bright-sided by Ehrenreich, Barbara Copyright © 2010 by Ehrenreich, Barbara. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
Smile or Die: The Bright Side of Cancer 15
The Years of Magical Thinking 45
The Dark Roots of American Optimism 74
Motivating Business and the Business of Motivation 97
God Wants You to Be Rich 123
Positive Psychology: The Science of Happiness 147
How Positive Thinking Destroyed the Economy 177
Postscript on Post– Positive Thinking 195
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
the first chapter was especially great . She talked about her experience getting breast cancer and the whole pink ribbon look on the brightside way of thinking that came with it.
Having read Ehrenreich's books on the disappearance of the middle class (Bait and Switch) and the horrendous conditions for the lower classes (Nickel and Dimed), I thought I'd check this one out, too, partially because I had someone at work tell me I really shouldn't post "negative" things on my Facebook because "future employers might see it and think you hate your students" (which I found ridiculous because, for one thing, that's my space and I should be free to rant there, and for another, I have it locked down on the tightest privacy settings possible). I figured she might be preaching to the choir--I already feel that a bit of cynicism might be healthy and realism is much healthier than the belief that nothing can ever go wrong as long as you're a Pollyanna--and I was mostly right. I did, however, learn quite a bit from the book, though overall it wasn't written quite as well as I've come to expect from Ehrenreich.I suspect the problem is that Ehrenreich took the subject much more personally than she's taken the others. The first chapter chronicles her battle with breast cancer and other patients' (and the doctors, and support staff, and society) insistence that positive thinking could help cure the disease, and exerting tremendous amounts of peer pressure to squash anger and other "negative" emotions related to battling a major disease. After this, she tackles the motivation industry and its pseudo-physics, American Christianity's adoption of positive thinking to turn god into an ATM, the APA's shaky research when it comes to positive thinking, and the ways in which this epidemic of positivity has contributed (and continues to contribute) to the current economic issues in America.The first halves, at least, of each chapter were well-written and got the point across, while the rest of each chapter tended to single out one or two guilty parties and belabor the point that what they were doing was fraudulent, harmful, and annoying. I suspect this book could easily have been half as long as it is without losing a whole lot of substance or content. However, perhaps for someone who didn't already agree with her, the parts that I found repetitious and tedious would be necessary to cement her argument and convince the skeptic.
As a "glass half empty" kind of gal, I really felt a bond with Ehrenreich and her message that positive thinking will be the ruination of us. The first chapter, about cancer, especially hit home. The phrase "tyranny of positive thinking," has stuck with me, because isn't THAT the truth? If you should be so unlucky as to die from cancer in this day and age, most people assume that the victim did something wrong because if you are positive enough you will SURELY conquer it--mind over matter! What a load of BS. Anyway, proponents of positive thinking will hate this, the realists of the world will see all the places where positive thinking has insinuated itself and be shocked at its spread throughout the modern American psyche.
Super well-researched, Ehrenreich was preaching to the choir with this one: as I write this review, I am 6 months into my latest stretch of unemployment. I have a chronic problem with unemployment, and if I bothered to do the math, I would probably discover that I have been unemployed more often than employed since scoring that graduate degree almost six years ago.This unemployment thing means that I am faced with what seems like a constant barrage of useless advice: "STAY POSITIVE!" "See this unemployment thing as a LEARNING opportunity!" Ehrenreich is fantastic at breaking down and explaining the science behind cancer, gives an excellent synopsis of how religion and various 20th century pop culture movements have influenced this bizarre cult of positivity. I highly recommend this to anyone who takes umbrage with the endless chirping of STAY POSITIVE.
Positive thinking can¿t be negative, right? Wrong! And Barbara Ehrenreich gives curmudgeons of the world license to be as negative (read: realistic) as we like. I¿m tired of all this positive thinking ¿ call me "negative," but I¿m sick of hearing about the ¿law of attraction,¿ and the other crap that¿s out there today. To almost quote the late George Carlin: ¿It¿s b--- s--- and it¿s bad for you!¿ And if all that ¿positive thinking¿ doesn¿t make the believers healthy, wealthy and famous (or whatever it is they desire), according to the positive thinking gurus, it¿s because they haven¿t believed hard enough, they haven¿t worked their program, they haven¿t banished all the negative thoughts. ¿Life coaches?¿ Give me a break! Sometimes bad things happen and there¿s no need to go blaming yourself for it. I have a friend and fellow non-believer in Barbara Ehrenreich. Phew! That felt good!