Scan barcode
leahxcx's review against another edition
3.0
This book is and felt pre-Trump. I found the footnotes patronizing. Regardless, very approachable non-fiction read (for me)! I do really like his takes - he’s quite charming and dorky. I really enjoy reading other people’s perspectives on culture.
mitchellvolk's review against another edition
challenging
funny
medium-paced
3.75
A wide-ranging exploration of what “the present” might look like when it becomes “the past.” I was predisposed to like this book because I’m frequently asking myself this question and I like the way Klosterman thinks and writes. Fascinating, thought-provoking and a necessary exercise.
catlyn_brooke's review against another edition
Honestly felt like this book was just the author talking out loud to himself in a meandering way with no point at the end of it. Listening to the introduction I thought I was going to hear something completely different, but then listened to him explaining that the best authors and books might not even be found yet for a solid hour. Maybe I would have liked something more further on in the book, but I couldn't focus long enough through the repetitive arguements to get there.
brandonadaniels's review against another edition
3.0
An easy listen. Not quite as interesting as The 90s, but it was entertaining enough.
subvino's review against another edition
This was really annoying and not for me at all. I usually enjoy Klosterman quite a bit so maybe it's just me!
duparker's review against another edition
3.0
Klosterman is someone I've read focused on music. Over time he has entered into a pop culture phase. I prefer the music based commentary, and found the "Rock, vs Rock and Roll vs Rock n Roll" chapter to be the most fleshed out here. Some of the more science based questions and discussion were lacking, but still buoyed by Chuck's language and intelligence.
mandirigma's review against another edition
4.0
I'll admit it -- this was actually a refreshing read amidst the insane news cycle we've been having for the past two years. His chapters on science and politics and simulation all took me a little bit longer to follow (also, I know he's famed for his pop culture criticism and I'm actually a huge fan of his writings on pop culture, but I actually skipped the chapter on the Beatles entirely). But this was really a fun, low-stakes mental exercise in asking somewhat absurd questions. I had fun with the process.
What made it an even weirder and more fascinating read was knowing the book had only been published in pre-election 2016, and already some of his examples had new layers to complicate things. For one, he cites recently-disgraced Junot Diaz (who was once my favorite author) regarding how the literary canon might look in a few hundred years. Diaz's answer is essentially that the canon will belong to the marginalized, which I don't disagree with, but it calls to mind the power structure among the marginalized. Knowing what we know now, are we cool with abusers deciding who belongs in the canon?
Similarly, the TV show Klosterman chooses for its ancillary verisimilitude ("a TV show that provided the most realistic portrait of the society that created it, without the self-aware baggage embedded in any overt attempt at doing so") is Roseanne, or at least its 90's version. Again, I don't disagree with this, but I have to wonder if the surrounding drama (Roseanne Barr as a personality in general, the recent revival, and the downfall) will have an impact on how the entire series is viewed in history. It's entirely possible that people 200 years from now will be able to separate the original series from all that, but WHAT IF I'M WRONG? What's the next best tv show to provide ancillary verisimilitude? I don't even think it exists!
I think I was most fascinated by the chapter The Case Against Freedom, mostly because it had a lot of arguments that many marginalized people have long been familiar with (namely the idea that the Constitution has not been applied to all people evenly and is therefore fallible), but Klosterman's cishet white guy perspective actually gave the issue room to breathe. His take on it didn't carry the weight of emotion and personal stake, and so he was able to ask questions and look at the Constitution and our political system and write about it in a way that most people can't or aren't allowed to, which I appreciated. This one is just a really good essay to read on its own.
The final chapter also added his human perspective to the whole book, which I appreciated. Most of the time, the book is a fun exercise until you think about its practical application. The topics he chose were high level enough that its easy to NOT think about its proximity to your daily life, but then what about climate change? In the last chapter, he actually explains why he did not include it in this book, and also talks the fears this stoked for him, and it was honestly kind of a relief for me. Like, thank god I'm not the only person who sometimes "catastrophizes" as my therapist likes to say.
Overall a great book, much like his other essay collections.
What made it an even weirder and more fascinating read was knowing the book had only been published in pre-election 2016, and already some of his examples had new layers to complicate things. For one, he cites recently-disgraced Junot Diaz (who was once my favorite author) regarding how the literary canon might look in a few hundred years. Diaz's answer is essentially that the canon will belong to the marginalized, which I don't disagree with, but it calls to mind the power structure among the marginalized. Knowing what we know now, are we cool with abusers deciding who belongs in the canon?
Similarly, the TV show Klosterman chooses for its ancillary verisimilitude ("a TV show that provided the most realistic portrait of the society that created it, without the self-aware baggage embedded in any overt attempt at doing so") is Roseanne, or at least its 90's version. Again, I don't disagree with this, but I have to wonder if the surrounding drama (Roseanne Barr as a personality in general, the recent revival, and the downfall) will have an impact on how the entire series is viewed in history. It's entirely possible that people 200 years from now will be able to separate the original series from all that, but WHAT IF I'M WRONG? What's the next best tv show to provide ancillary verisimilitude? I don't even think it exists!
I think I was most fascinated by the chapter The Case Against Freedom, mostly because it had a lot of arguments that many marginalized people have long been familiar with (namely the idea that the Constitution has not been applied to all people evenly and is therefore fallible), but Klosterman's cishet white guy perspective actually gave the issue room to breathe. His take on it didn't carry the weight of emotion and personal stake, and so he was able to ask questions and look at the Constitution and our political system and write about it in a way that most people can't or aren't allowed to, which I appreciated. This one is just a really good essay to read on its own.
The final chapter also added his human perspective to the whole book, which I appreciated. Most of the time, the book is a fun exercise until you think about its practical application. The topics he chose were high level enough that its easy to NOT think about its proximity to your daily life, but then what about climate change? In the last chapter, he actually explains why he did not include it in this book, and also talks the fears this stoked for him, and it was honestly kind of a relief for me. Like, thank god I'm not the only person who sometimes "catastrophizes" as my therapist likes to say.
Overall a great book, much like his other essay collections.
perlstein's review against another edition
5.0
Ugh. I'm such an idiot. Every book I read I think, "wait the world works like this?!? How come no one told me?"