Social Sciences Books

This is an amazing book with anecdootes and resources for anyone looking for an encore to their life's adventure. I recommend this to everyone and appreciatethe focus and passion. It is a perfect complimant for Three Cups of Tea!!!

As a career counselor for individuals in the second half of life, I found Encore to be an excellent resource for seekers as well as those of us guiding the next generation of "non-retirees". Freedman aptly describes the frustrations that this pioneering group faces as they attempt to identify their next endeavor and find or create an appropriate match in the marketplace. I hope that Freeman's comprehensive work is recognized by policy-makers, funders and employers who will support the evolution of encore careers and the generation of individuals who will serve in them.

Tabloid-style headlines have infected even mainstream magazines and newspapers in recent years. Articles about the coming "Social Security Disaster" vie for attention next to those on industry's inability to overcome the "Loss Of Baby Boomer Talent" or even fears that "Baby Boomers Will Retire Into Poverty." And these are not all the ravings of radio talk show hosts trying to build audience share. Experts like the Federal Reserve's Ben Bernanke and Alan Greenspan have aired similar views on occasion.

Now comes author and social entrepreneur Marc Freedman to suggest that such doom and gloom are not necessary. In his new book Encore, Freedman insists that demography is not destiny. Sub-titled Finding Work That Matters In The Second Half Of Life, this excellent volume describes a number of alternative futures that could benefit us all. Freedman argues that actions we take today could simultaneously improve the national economy, strengthen our society, and improve the lot of aging Boomers throughout the land:
. For the sake of the economy, he asks that Boomers choose to - and be allowed to - remain productive;
. For the sake of society in general, he encourages Boomers to continue sharing their talents and experience; and
. For the sake of individual Boomers, he recommends changes that will allow them to remain gainfully employed, self-sustaining, and engaged in meaningful roles.

Today individual choices are often limited either to: a) 30 years of mind-numbing TV, golf and shuffleboard in the "Golden Years;" or b) greeting bargain-seekers as glorified doormen in the "Wal-Mart Years." While such retail sector bridge jobs might provide needed sustenance, they do little to maintain self-esteem or to benefit society in general. Freedman shows many ways in which tomorrow could be better than today, through a series of individual portraits of new American pioneers. As he describes them, "Instead of the freedom from work, they are searching for the freedom to work; instead of saving for a 'secure retirement,' they are underwriting an encore career."

So what could Boomers do in Freedman's bold new world? As he shows in his examples, they could:
. Stay on in their current roles instead of retiring, perhaps with more varied schedules or lesser work demands;
. Turn to helping professions such as teaching or nursing, which desperately need staff in many parts of the country;
. Learn and grow into entirely new careers, either in new interest areas or simply in response to changes in the economy; or
. Take on social entrepreneuring activities, much as Freedman has himself, in order to improve the world around us.

He also suggests ways in which today's rules about retirement could be modified, in order to help everyone involved. For example, retirees may now earn additional Social Security benefits by working from age 65 to age 68, but gain nothing more by continuing past that point. Further, they are discouraged from doing so by being forced to pay into Social Security even when they could be receiving payments from it. Similarly, employers are forced to provide equal benefits for all, even if some could be covered by Medicare. Changes to each of these policies, among others, could encourage both employers and employees to rethink today's typical forced-retirement scenarios.

Those facing medical or other issues should certainly be protected by the same options and benefits available today. Others, however, might value the opportunity to continue as productive citizens. Many, in fact, will have no choice but what Freedman calls "the practical necessity of extending working lives" - there's certainly more than a few grains of truth in all of those stories about Boomers not being financially ready to retire. Even those who do have adequate funds might not want to be set out to pasture, however. Leading-edge Boomers today, as a group, are healthier than any such age cohort which has come before them. They are likely to remain physically and mentally able to be productive for ten, twenty or even more years into the future.

Marc Freedman, by the way, does put his own energy where his mouth is. As founder and CEO of San Francisco's Civic Ventures, he has helped establish new activities including the Experience Corps, the Next Chapter, the Lead With Experience Campaign, and the Purpose Prize. You can learn more about these and other new ideas at his website, www.civicventures.org.

His book is a clearly-written and exciting vision of an alternative future that we can begin building today. Buy it now and start own encore career!

Society may never see another demographic group like the baby boom generation - people born between 1946 and 1964. During the 1950s, their great numbers dramatically changed everything, from manufacturing and construction to education and health care. The boomers' idealism and social activism branded the 1960s and 1970s. In subsequent decades, baby boomers changed the workplace and all other areas of life. Now, as this generation enters its retirement years, it is shaking things up again. Unlike previous seniors, boomers are not content to trudge quietly off the stage. Instead, many are choosing second careers in public service. In the process, boomers are redefining not only retirement but also work. Marc Freedman discusses this phenomenon and what it means for society by presenting profiles of baby boomers who took up second, service-oriented careers when they reached retirement age. Their stories are inspiring. getAbstract recommends this book to professionals in their late 50s and beyond who want to put their hard-won expertise to work on behalf of others.

With people living longer and having the opportunity to remain in the workforce longer, this is a book that needed to be written. Americans have more options than ever upon reaching retirement age. We can continue to work, we can retire, we can travel, etc. The author, Freedman, spells out in delicious detail those choices, and the result of whatever one we choose.

The book makes a point that others have made, but perhaps spells it out more directly. That point being that you may live longer, and be healthier, than your grandparents, and even your parents. Thus you had best be prepared, financially, mentally and emotionally.

I found the book to be a rather fast read and always interesting. I'd go so far as to say it's the best book about the second half of life I've read. The FUNNIEST book on the subject is Martha Bolton's "Race You To The Fountain of Youth." Hysterical. Race You to the Fountain of Youth: I'm Not Dead Yet (But parts of me are going fast)

I think Freedman's book about the second half of life is worth reading for anyone approaching retirement age. You have important decisions to make. Make then wisely or possibly pay for them later.

Like the other six books in the Franny K. Stein library, The Frandidate is another marvelous invention born from the mind of Jim Benton. We never grow tired of Franny's crazy antics and creations in my household, which is especially impressive when you consider that I have two sons, and well, Franny is a girl. I guess mad science is truly a topic enthralling to both genders. In this seventh book, Franny decides to run for class president. Typical for a mad scientist, Franny's thoughts on how to improve the classroom are slightly extreme. Franny's ideas for exploding chalk for a wrong answer written on the chalkboard or robots who force you to eat a healthy lunch don't go over well with her classmates. The other candidates' speeches about new playground equipment or less homework win greater support with the students. Franny realizes that she is going to have to please all of the students in her class and sets out to invent a suit that will allow her to become whatever another person wants her to be. If a classmate loves bunnies, wearing the suit, Franny becomes a bunny. If a student loves basketball, then Franny can become their favorite basketball player. It's all very simple for a mad scientist, and Franny wins the class election by a landslide. Soon the power has gone to her head, though, and Franny decides that she can just as easily become the President of the United States. It takes a quick thinking lab assistant and a truth seeking mom, to save Franny and the rest of the world from a little mad science gone wrong. Lucky for Franny that the members of her cabinet are so well chosen.

The Rainbow Fairy books are a favorite of my daughter's. She has read many of them and loves when we get her a new one.

This is a remarkably unsentimental portrayal of a black man's white, Jewish mother who finds a life with those of another race more sustaining than staying with her own.

I wanted to love this book. And I almost did. I was hooked at the beginning, but the further I read, the more discouraged I became. I could not really like any of the people and I was not impressed at all with "Mommy" or at least the portrayal of her. I think the story was good, but the telling of it was weak, unclear and toward the end, rambling. There were several spots where it could have and in my opinion should have, ended. Indeed, I set it aside for over a week with only 50 pages to go and only finished it when I had nothing else to read.

This book was recommended to me by a friend who also happens to be an English professor. I won't go into the story line as others have done so here already. Suffice it to say that it is a beautifully crafted book about love and the human spirit. Don't miss it!

I read this book when I was in the 11th grade, I simply love it. I actually had to reread the first 4 chapters twice, because I was so confused at first. Tha authors style of writing and they way the book was split leaves you a little confused, but then u realize it is his life and then his mothers. I simply enjoyed this book. It not only discusses what life is like for a black boy, but for a white woman engaged in an interracial relationship and the struggles she faced. We so often hear about the Black struggle...its good to see boths sides for once!

This book had been on my shelf for a long time. Having just finished it, I can only wish that I would have read it much, much sooner.

This book alternates chapters between the author's voice (the son, James McBride) and the mother's voice. He uses italics for those chapters in his mother's words and, while it seems this would be clear enough, I still got very confused in the first half of the book. I would begin a chapter knowing it was in the mother's voice because of the italics but, once I was heavily into the chapter, I would get confused about the family history because both her chapters and his chapters are written in first person. This is the only reason I gave this book 4 stars vs. 5, because it was otherwise an outstanding and truly touching read.

This is the story of a white Jewish woman who marries a black man and raises 12 children (a combination of his children and her second husband's). Despite the fact that the family was desperately poor during much of their lives, all of her children went to college and most went on to be doctors, teachers, nurses, etc. She wasn't exactly the picture of a smiling, perfect Donna Reed-like mom; she was a tough cookie, but she fiercely loved her children and raised them to be good people. All of this while being completely shunned by her own family because she married a black man and left home against the wishes of her tyrant father.

In my earlier adulthood, I definitely had a chip on my shoulder about my own childhood not being a piece of cake but, when compared with this woman's ordeal, my family was something out of a happy-go-lucky TV sitcom. I think anyone who is in a "my life is so hard" mindset would be well served by reading this book. Sometimes what we need is a healthy dose of someone *else's* reality to remind us that our own is not really all that bad.

I was very please with my book purchase. Great discount price, unbelieveable prompt delivery, and the book itself is well written.

I am very disappointed in Amazon and the seller that they allowed to sell on their site. It has been two months and I still have NOT received the textbook: Methods in Behvioral Research!!!....very very poor service and unprofessional. Would not use Amazon again!....This service does not even deserve one star-the service I received does not deserve any stars..

I thought the content was going to help me understand better the hard copy version and test me on the information. It did explain some things better, but it didn't test me on the hard cover book. So, there's really no point in buying this one if you have the hardcover. Oh well.

The book was clean, covered and just what I asked for. The biggest thing was that I didn't have any shipping problems with this order.

At first the title of the book may appear daunting, but a look inside reveals a very well written book. Takes confusing topics and helps explain them in ways that a student will understand. I found it incredibly useful in my course!

The author's name rhymes with ...?? Enough said; good book to see liberal thought process if you don't mistakenly try to follow him logically all the way through. Accept him for what he is and the 'progressive' philosphy for what it is; a feel good worldview that is accepted and defended with religous zeal. Useful NOT in understanding logic of modern Liberalism, but helpful in understanding Bush derangement syndrome, their fear and loathing of truly religous people, and even those who love and respect the Founding Fathers and the truly unique and incredible system of self-governance they created. Not an honest or comprehensive comparison of the two schools of thought, nor the history of how Liberalism of this kind has always failed and worsened the lives of those they espouse to care about, as contrasted to how American Conservatism has worked every time it's been attempted WITHOUT too much (see Bush 1 and 2) watering down.

A major reason that it has been difficult for self professed conservatives (of various stripes including libertarian)to make headway in normal society is that they have no principles, only bunches of whining excuses for social and economic Darwinism. Conservatism is nothing but a set of excuses for "Screw you, I got mine," only now they don't feel the need for any cover whatsoever. Conservatives and their roach motel "think tanks" write ideologically prescribed papers based solely on references to other demented conservative nonthinkers. A curse on those mutants who cannot tolerate any iota of uncertainty and worship at the altar of Reagan, a true idiot, coversational savant though he may have been. So, now this pack of craven curs takes it upon themselves to excoriate Lakoff--like Swiftboat liars.

I'm giving this book 5 stars because I found it fascinating, and would recommend it. But I must confess that I have mixed feelings about it. This book attempts to explain why some Americans are "progressive" and others are "conservative" based on their conception of morality, which stems from their views about the family. This theory of political affiliation is built on Lakoff's theories of cognitive linguistics and metaphorical thought (which are best explained in the excellent book he coauthored with Mark Johnson: "Philosophy in the Flesh" -- which is a must-read for anyone who is interested in language and how the mind works). I find Lakoff's theories of cognitive linguistics to be very insightful. I also find his theory of political affiliation to be plausible. However, I do see some problems with it.

First, Lakoff focuses exclusively on American politics. It isn't clear how well this theory would apply to politics outside of the United States. Unless we want to assume that American politics are radically different from politics in other countries, a theory that explains political affiliation in the U.S. would also have to be able to explain political affiliation in other nations.

Second, Lakoff's theory divides people's moral and political views into just two broad camps: "conservative" and "progressive". He argues that an individual can have a mixture of conservative and progressive views (e.g. one can take a progressive view on some things and a conservative view on others); but he insists that there are no other political and moral viewpoints that one can hold, and that there is no such thing as a true political "moderate". For me, this is the one aspect of Lakoff's theory that is hardest to swallow. Nonetheless, I think he's got some good insights here; and his theory is potentially useful.

This is an excellent book, even though the author is biased towards liberalism. His great contribution is to introduce the possibility of objective neutrality into the discussion of politics, and then to provide a unifying theory on the nature of the differences between liberals and conservatives. According to Lakoff, this difference lies in two different views of the nature of the nuclear family, and the connection to politics is the result of people projecting their "family values" onto the political stage. Lakoff describes the conservative as favoring a "strict father" model of the nuclear family, while a liberal favors a "nurturing parent" model. It is here, at the very beginning, that Lakoff's bias begins to show. His names for the two family models immediately introduces an ideological and gendered bias. Why not moral-PARENT as conservative and permissive-MOTHER as liberal, the way an unapologetic conservative might have framed the problem? The way Lakoff frames the problem, a value judgement has already been implied. Of course the strict-father family is dysfunctional when compared to a nurturing-parent family, but so is the permissive-mother family compared to a moral-parent family.

From a sociobiological point of view, the two dysfunctional families (strict father, permissive mother) are dysfunctional because the respective parent has opted for power and control and has become predatory upon the children, the strict-father requiring obedience through the use of force and the permissive-mother through the inducement of crippling dependence. Non-dysfunctional families require that children be nurtured AND taught to be self-reliant, so that they may one day become functioning adults, replacing the parents as family representatives. From a sociobiological point of view, the power grab inside the family is pathological because the predatory actions of the parent, who will not live forever, and whose only genetic legacy is the family, serve to destroy that very legacy. Governments on the other hand, do not die a natural death.

Lakoff introduces the link to politics by seeing correctly that people tend to view the nation as a large tribe or family. The nation-as-family metaphor, with the government in the role of parent, has only variations along the mother-father or, equivalently, liberal-conservative dimension. But both are authoritarian in nature, with the citizen as child. What about the other possibility of citizen-as-adult? The idea of nation-as-family probably comes from our thousands of years of evolution under the tribe-as-family metaphor which is valid because the tribe is essentially an extended family of genetically close individuals. The leader of a tribe could be depended upon to not engage in too much predatory behavior on the members of his own tribe because it would be pathological in an evolutionary sense and therefore selected against. The same is not true of a genetically diverse nation.

The metaphor of government-as-parent is less appropriate for the modern nation to the degree that the nation is genetically inhomogeneous. For a genetically diverse democracy like the United States, the paradigm of nation-as-parent is particularly pathological. The advantage to be gained by a "parent" (politician) doing a power grab, which would be dysfunctional in a family, becomes very advantageous for the parent (politician) in such a genetically diverse environment, resulting in a liberal government-as-shepherd or conservative government-as-wolf predatory metaphor in which the government represents itself to the electorate as a caring parent, but in fact is engaged in a sophisticated form of predation upon the citizen-as-sheep. (I know, the shepherd metaphor is generally an emotionally positive metaphor but I never heard of a vegetarian shepherd, if you get my drift).

In summary, Lakoff has opened a new way of thinking about politics which, if his bias can be successfully ignored, can be very enlightening and valuable to any politically minded person, no matter what their political persuasion.

As a practicing Unitarian Universalist, this book was recommended to me very highly by two UU ministers whom ordinarily I trusted. However, I'm sorry to say when I read this book, I was appalled at how poor it was. I'm not saying that because I'm a right-winger sort. Far from it. I would describe myself as someone with a history of being leftist in my adult life, and still am on many issues. But in recent years I have questioned my earlier liberalism and have come to embrace views on some issues that resemble conservative ideas.

The first thing Lakoff did to offend me was that he failed to live up to his promise that he would be impartial to both liberals and conservatives. He said he would do so until the last chapter, where he would then give himself license to give his own opinion as to which view he preferred. He did okay for the first few chapters, but his thinly disguised agenda became more obvious as the book went on. You would think someone who was supposed to be an expert on metaphor would have better skills at hiding his own bias.

But that wasn't the worst of it. Lakoff uses the "stern father" as his key metaphor for conservatives and the "nurturing mother" metaphor for liberalism. Fair enough up to a point. But after a while, to hammer away at the reader with the same two simplistic metaphors amounts to a gross injustice to the subject in question. There comes a point where one should realize that metaphor is only a tool of limited application. It's only an idea that at best approximately illustrates the reality we find around us. Lakoff's method apparently is to invent a metaphor, then treat his metaphor as though it were an independent source of insight, even more so than the empirical object to which the metaphor originally referred. That's getting the cart in front of the horse, to use a classic metaphor myself. This book might itself be studied as a case study of the danger of over-extrapolation.

But the thing I found to be an outrage and an insult to my intelligence was this: I was told that Lakoff is the metaphor expert. The man has devoted his whole career to the idea of metaphor as a key to making sense of reality. Yet Lakoff himself is guilty of the most obvious misuses of metaphor, i.e. reckless over-extrapolation, and confusing the map with the territory itself. For my money, this book was embarrassingly bad.

I'm writing this as the mother of an adopted Ethiopian child- I bought this book after a random search and it has been the most valuable book of our whole adoption journey. It's loaded with helpful background info on the AIDS & Orphan crises in Ethiopia, history of Ethiopia, insight into the cultural perceptions of adoption (especially by affluent, white Westerners!) and the very moving perspectives of the orphans themselves, and their Ethiopian caretakers. The heroine of this story is very real, and her character development was deep and insightful. I laid the book down several times to have a good laugh (or cry!) but could hardly keep from turning the pages. Whether you are adopting yourself, supporting someone who is, or just interested in learning more about Ethiopia and this heroine's story, I know you will come away inspired.

Author Melissa Fay Greene, who is the adoptive mother of two Ethiopian children, relates the story of Haregewoin Teferra, an Ethiopian mother who becomes the foster mother for a multitude of AIDS orphans during the height of the pandemic. Greene truthfully tells the tale without painting Teferra as a "modern day Mother Teresa," but rather as a very real and human woman who is asked by clerics to take in one abandoned orphan after another. A grieving mother whose adult daughter died from AIDS, Teferra discovers that helping the children provides her with a means of overcoming her grief. The individual stories of these "lost children" who arrive on Teferra's doorstep are riveting, as is Greene's account of the assimilation of her adoptive children into her family. Accompanying photos show children shortly after they arrived in very bad shape at Treferra's compound and then later with adoptive American families.
Greene spares no one as she rails against the pharmaceutical companies that withheld AIDS medications from third-world countries at the height of the pandemic, causing the loss of a whole generation of parents. Despite having no drugs to help the children, hit-or-miss medical care, and scarce food for all, Teferra does her best to feed, clothe, house, and educate the orphans put in her care. Although one might think that this book is a "downer," it is a very uplifting page-turner that relates the indominable spirit of one Ethiopian woman and her many foster children.

Melissa Faye Green is an excellent writer. She is a true artist painting a vivid picture of scenes, and weaving historical, political and social aspects of the deadly HIV/AIDS epidemic. This is an incredibly powerful book. It is not easy to read due to the difficult emotional toll it can take on one, but I felt morally obligated to read it, so that I wasn't just shutting out the devastating misery suffered by so many millions. She portrays the human face of this awful disease with poignancy. It is an inspiring and human story of one woman's efforts to alleviate her own and others suffering. God bless Melissa for opening our eyes.

This was a wonderful book! Having myself been to Addis Ababa recently (July 07) with my daughter to pick up her adopted Ethiopian baby boy (4 months old), you can just imagine how this story of one woman's love for so many orphans resonated with me. The book is a quick read -- something interesting in every chapter. The author intertwined Haregewoin's up and down story with bits of Ethiopian history and the unwinding spread and theories of HIV-AIDs plus added her own experience with H. and the adoption her own Ethiopian children -- which made the reader come away with a true cultural experience. H. is truly a "Mother Theresa" figure and an inspiration to all women. Thank you, Melissa, for introducing us to her. I really enjoyed having the photos of many of the children and their adoptive families to relate to. I will be sure that my daughter reads this book and I have suggested it to my book club in Boulder, CO which will read it in the fall. -- Gayle Weiss

I like what the story is about, however the book has so much detail it is hard to get through the first chapters.

its a must read - even for those who would not agree that technology destroys culture. dangers are real and it is worth following the author on what they are.but technology has changed life - and not always for the worse. like climate change we dont want the scare but the reality need to be known - and thats where the importance of the book lies.

A well reasoned assault on the modern embrace of technology for its own sake, this book delivers a somber message. Cultures without an organizing belief system tend to collapse, and our instantized consumer society is extremely good at dispensing with belief in anything beyond dollars and cents. Postman sorts history into three bins: tool users, technocracies, and technopolies. The first is self explanatory, and tool use becomes a technocracy when machines become pervasive enough to require bureaucracies to manage their use. But the goal remains the same -- improvement of the human condition. The next stage is reached when preservation and expansion of technology becomes paramount -- often at the expense of human well being. Technological change becomes valued for its own sake, regardless of the impact -- in fact, the impact is no longer weighed. A simple example: connecting every school in America to the internet is deemed good and perhaps inevitable without any proof whatever that computers or interconnection benefits students or education. (My question: If we build it, will they numb?) Postman's practical suggestion is that we re-think education goals. While admitting that schools alone cannot end technopoly, he suggests that we can create a generation of loving resistance fighters. That is, citizens who understand that history is really "histories," reinterpreted in each age; that language matters, with particular attention to semantics; that every technology, from language to microelectronics, comes with a bias and causes effects both intended and not, both visible and hidden. Education, he insists, is not about job skills, it is about thinking. As an organizing principal Postman offers Jacob Bronowski's theme in THE ASCENT OF MAN (Little Brown & Co, 1976), the story of humanity from its origins, with all of the brilliance, pain, victory, struggle and understanding that make us who we are. An excellent, excellent book.

In his book, Conscientous Objections, Postman considers the question, "Why are books so long?" concluding that they don't have to be, and then gives a synopsis of Amusing Ourselves to Death, his most famous work. That book, like this book, is well worth reading, but this book could benefit from the same treatment. I could quote numerous long passages in this review, but instead I'll just give the once over lightly version, and the synopsis will have to wait.

The basic idea is that cultures start as tool using cultures, then move into Technocracies, which is to say, become dependent on technology, and then, if they are the US, become a Technopoly, where any other world view, including the two previously named, gets short shrift. Clearly this is the US in a nutshell. However, the second stage, Technocracy (and he only calls it that a few times) needs a bit more elaboration.

Technology is a clunky word, unlike the elegant, simple Latin names in most of the sciences. What Postman means is closer to Jacques Ellul's idea of technique in The Technological Society. That idea is that we invent a technique for some end (the Ford assembly line comes to mind), and then must conform to that technique to achieve that end (which seems obvious), and then become essentially enslaved to the technique.

Maybe that even seems obvious. Anyway, in the chapter, The Loving Resistance Fighter, Postman gives his rather surprising suggestions, which he doesn't see as a solution but as a course of action. Since he's written so much about it, once again he calls for a revolution in education. The sorts of courses he wants include comparative religions, semantics, and something like philosophy of science. So the next surprise for me was to realize I had a profoundly Postmanian education, and the effect was to render me, long after the fact, grateful for those visionary teachers.

The worst written (I don't know why) chapter is on sociology, but here he makes some of the best points. The need to use clunky words like technology all the time makes this book somewhat dense and confusing. However, Neil offers a great many lucid summaries and I found myself laughing aloud at some parts. I think this may have been one of his last books; I only heard him speak once in, I think, the '90s, and he left us soon after. But not before leaving this parting gift.

Neil Postman could be considered a reactionary against television. Certaintly, this is how many people see him. However, if you really look into his beliefs you'll see that he doesn't like commerical media because it effectively restricts all but the most common denominator. This is because by challenging an audience you run the risk of alienating them which means that your ratings go down and, subsequently, so do your commercial rates... meaning less money.

In a speech to a group of conservative Austrians, Postman stated that television and other new, commericial technologies were all a part of a seductive imperialism of the USA (though not implemented by the government). The real conundrum for Postman though, is that conservatives have come to be defined as always for the capitalist free market, yet state run media, as propossed by conservatives such as Herbert Hoover, would actually be far LESS restricting than commercial media. Because of that, a state run programme would have more content and less focus on sensation. A side affect would eb the return of attention spans greater than a minute or two.

And this, in a nutshell, is how Postman's arguments work. I personally agree with him, but he does often make me depressed... ah well. Was Postman a reactionary? I don't think so. I think, by a cultural vantage, you can clearly see the negative aspects that he's pointing out. But will his message ever be practised? I wouldn't be betting on it.

Like all of Neil Postman's writing, this book is thought provoking and accesable. I highly recommend it.

Written in a somewhat angry spirit, this book is one of many that have appeared in recent years that could with fairness be labeled as "technoreactionary". These books lament the current state of technology and believe it to be "alienating' and socially disruptive. They do not want to eliminate technology, but instead put it in its "proper place", with the latter not really being defined, but with the implicit connotation being clear: technology has run rampant over traditional worldviews and has become very unhealthy for the human condition.

According to the author cultures can be classified into three types, and all are represented in the modern world. The first type is called tool making and was the predominant culture up until the seventeenth century. One can still find tool-making cultures in isolated parts of the world, and the author invites the reader to seek them out. The second type is referred to as a "technocracy", wherein the old tool making culture is retained to some degree but where technology is beginning to be pursued for its own sake, with its social impact essentially ignored and its dynamic manifesting itself in bureaucracies. The third type is the "technopoly", which is not defined explicitly but instead is characterized by its uncritical acceptance by the culture that practices it.

American culture is a technopoly writes the author, and is the sole example at the present time. He gives several reasons why it became one. It first had to pass through the `technocratic' stage, this occurring somewhere along the time of the publication of the Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith, whose ideas gave credence to the need for "impersonal, large-scale" production. Humans were then reduced to being "barterers" and "wealth seekers." Machines were invented to make machines, and inventing became the predominant pastime, with no cognizance taken of why invention should take place. Humans became not children of God but "consumers", all subject to the ups and downs of the marketplace. But then America morphed into a "technopoly," with its emphasis on scientific management, the replacement of human judgment with calculation, and meaning in social life is only to be found in the context of "machinery and technique." But for America to become a technopoly also required an "improbable world", which is characterized by an uncritical acceptance of the authority of science and a lack of what he calls an "information immune system" that will allow effective filtering of extraneous information and provide worldviews and narratives that give societies coherence and meaning.

Because of his aversion for change, and his willingness to accept myths and other cultural narratives for their ability to maintain social cohesiveness, the author follows the conservative political tradition. He complains of the tendency of technocracy/technopoly to negate the past or even turn its back on it, disrespecting traditions and supplanting them with new but very ephemeral ones. The "continuity" of family life and regional traditions are to be discarded, not because they are immoral necessarily but because they are superfluous. In a technopoly one for example does not pray for relief from disease; one uses penicillin. One does not set down roots: being mobile is the predominant lifestyle.

But it is the scientific worldview that makes modern society appear so alien to the author and to many people at the present time. Since discoveries are occurring so fast, this worldview can take on the appearance of being too "conceptually permissive." The author gives examples in his treatment of the "improbable world." But science is now giving interpretations to notions that were just a decade ago considered "off limits" to scientific investigation. For example, its view of romantic love has its origin in various chemical/neuronal processes in the brain. And then there is genetic engineering, particularly in its use of transgenic technologies, which has allowed a much more extended notion of species. A goat can take on the genes of a spider and produce silk for example, allowing spiders and goat to be related by deliberate technological intervention. And genetics of course has shown just how similar humans are to other life forms, and how easy it might be to alter human genetics to make humans even more similar to these life forms.

But the author never gives a convincing argument as to why a technopoly is unhealthy or alienating, and there are many readers that will demand he speak for himself when he makes commentary on the alienating and dominating influence of technology. Such readers, and this reviewer is one of them, find life in the modern world very exciting and meaningful. We are proud apologists for scientism and technology. We deify it and we are drunk with it, but we never get a hangover from its contemplation and indulging ourselves in it. And we will not hesitate, not for a second, in continuing to push forward its frontiers with new discoveries and new applications. And when one technology is found to be dangerous or threatening, we will work incessantly in finding another one to negate these dangers. And yes, from a particular point of view we do surrender ourselves to technology, but not from the love of domination.

It is our curiosity that we surrender to: we do not interrupt its flow and we deliberately and unashamedly move across boundaries in order to understand and explore new frontiers. No idea, no conception, and no invention is considered to be off limits, and we take delight in the disturbance of cognitive equilibrium. We worship creativity, ingenuity, and the smashing of old tablets. Our heroes are scientists, inventors, and technicians. Our morning coffee is the perusal of patent applications and preprint servers. We only feel envy when we think of future generations, when contemplating their immersion in technologies not yet envisaged. And life in the modern world is utopia for us: we feel privileged to be able to participate in this maelstrom of discovery, in this intoxicating technopoly called the twenty-first century.

The theme based school where I work will start with the theme of "Who Counts?" and it covers politics and elections on different levels for the children who attend our K-8 school. I picked up Susan E. Goodman's book because I was familiar with her other books, and I knew my students would love it. I just finished the book myself, and I really learned a lot about past presidents and elections. Goodman covers the 2000 election in a language that is easy for kids to access but does not simplify the situation. I also like how she addresses the different periods of time in the history of the USA when people other then while males couldn't vote. I plan on buying multiple copies of this book so that each classroom at our school can have one.

With See How They Run: Campaign Dreams, Election Schemes, and the Race to the White House, Susan E. Goodman has again proved that a sometimes unsavory subject can be treated with humor and wonder. As in The Truth About Poop and its companion Gee Whiz! It's All About Pee, Goodman turns her inquisitive nature and journalistic pursuit of truth into a fascinating investigation, explanation and exhortation for young people, encouraging them to take part in the fabulous, fallible democracy they've been born into. Elwood H. Smith makes excellent use of his illustrative opportunities to impart ideas both jovial and informative, sometimes clarifying the sophisticated ideas in the text, other times making jokes that the average middle-schooler will certainly get.
This fascinating history, explanation and guide captivates adult minds also. How well can you explain the electoral college system, or why it exists in the first place? Goodman is committed to a view of our leaders as imperfect mortal humans, not the demigods many children's biographers make them out to be. Jefferson is outed as a negative propagandist; Harrison's foolish two hour inaugural speech during a snowstorm resulted in his lethal pneumonia. From detailing who was accorded the right to vote and when, through campaign fundraising and mudslinging, to elections of mules by an uninformed populace, Goodman makes a complex subject both alluring and accessible. Inspiring stories of what kids have done to influence politics are interwoven with fascinating anecdotes about the (so far only) men who have run for president, and those committed to helping them win. The role of media is examined, and the inclusion of a glossary, extra resources to delve into for both younger and older readers, and a detailed index help to make this a perfect reference book for any classroom.
A load of extra visual stimuli, including sidebars, wish lists, Benjamin Franklin quotes, and an hilarious "Presidential Facts" photo gallery add to the entertainment value of this educational tome. All in all, an invaluable addition to any American home, with or without kids.

Hey everyone! I just wanted to let you know there is a GREAT event coming up almost a week away in New York City. The American Place Theatre's Festival: Literature to Life is performing a theatrical adaptation of FLIGHT by Sherman Alexie on September 21st, 2008. Don't miss out on this wonderful opportunity to see this moving piece of literature come to life. Here's the information and can't wait to see you there!

[...]

FLIGHT, by Sherman Alexie was a violent, yet always humorous book. In this action-packed adventure-fiction novel, the main character, Zits, passes through the body of several people involved with Native Americans during the Native American genocide era.
In the beginning of FLIGHT, Zits meets a 17-year-old boy named Justice, who teaches him to enjoy killing. Later, Zits visits a bank in downtown Seattle, where he shoots several people with a paint-ball-gun and a pistol. Zits is then transferred to the body of a white FBI agent in the 1970's. Next he becomes a Native American boy during the battle at Little Bighorn. Afterwards, Zits inhabits the body of a Native American tracker in the 19th century. Finally, he becomes a pilot of a small plane in the 21st century...
As I said before, FLIGHT is a very funny book; however, some of the humor may not be appropriate for children 12 and under. It has a great ending (which I'm not going to spoil). One annoying thing is that when Zits transfers to a new body, there are a lot of boring details that follow. Another bothersome thing is the main character's nickname throughout the course of the story.
FLIGHT left me satisfied. It was a great summer read. I suggest this book to anyone looking for a fun book to enjoy.

This book is a personal favorite of mine. Sherman Alexie never ceases to surprise, entertain, or inform me. This story is a fictional work that brings much needed attention to several issues including but not limited to race, class, child abuse, the astonishing rate of alcoholism in native Americans, the struggle many foster children face on a daily basis, the ability of people to be indifferent, as well as their incredible capacity to care. This book took me through every range of emotion, and yes, big sap that I am, I did cry at the end.

Alexie tackles some tough topics. This book is in no way easy, but it is a great and ultimately very satisfying book.

"Flight": a surprisingly sophisticated book that can be read in an afternoon. Alexie uses his classic prose that takes the reader into a world that is real and haunting. Less than 200 pages in length, yet complex- tackles the issues of hate, love, revenge, destiny, power. Narrated by a teenager who is half-Indian, half-Irish, he goes on a journey through time where he inhabits the bodies of an Indian child, an Indian tracker, an FBI agent, and a pilot in order to learn a crucial lesson- but is the lesson learned, and learned in time?

I had no idea where this book was going when I first started it, and I was kept fascinated all the way through. A beautiful story, really wonderful. Read "Flight" and come away enriched.