Scan barcode
sarah_david1979's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
2.0
I mean... ugh.
This took me forever to get through because IT. IS. DRY. It's also incredibly dense. Imagine the thickest, dryest loaf of bread you've ever eaten and there isn't a glass of water around for miles. You can really only consume it in small bites. This isn't one you're gonna want to devour.
The irony is that you feel the need to finish because the author immediately sets this tone of, "People have become so mindless because of television that they simply aren't capable of the deep thinking required by reading. They are sooooo dumb and need to be entertained by EVERYTHING. They can't even handle a boring book that's full of great points!" Well played, Postman. I was like, "Well, not me! I'm gonna read this whole boring book just to prove I can do it."
Sure, there are nuggets of truth. But also... calm down.
It did make me think about the world of entertainment we live in today and how we got here.
But it also never mentioned slavery during the first few chapters which felt like a major oversight if we're making claims that basically everyone had access to texts, and thus, we were the most educated society in history. I kept wondering, "Is he going to make a connection between the lack of slaves' access to texts and their ability to engage in important national conversations?" No. Glossed right over that part so he could continue his analysis of how television is making us absolute zombies who are incapable of critical thinking.
He also made claims about how television negatively influences education and curriculum that (I believe) have not come to fruition since the book's publication.
In the end, I felt like he was just an old-timer that was pissed and shaking his fist at the changing world.
One thing I definitely did agree with was his proposed solution: Let teachers fix the problem of understanding the impacts of television because (as he notes) teachers are ultimately who we turn to whenever there is a societal problem that needs fixing. Thanks for putting that on my shoulders. Ha! (For what it's worth, I do think the world of education has risen to this demand.)
Anyhow, I wouldn't recommend it unless you're looking for a sleep aid.
This took me forever to get through because IT. IS. DRY. It's also incredibly dense. Imagine the thickest, dryest loaf of bread you've ever eaten and there isn't a glass of water around for miles. You can really only consume it in small bites. This isn't one you're gonna want to devour.
The irony is that you feel the need to finish because the author immediately sets this tone of, "People have become so mindless because of television that they simply aren't capable of the deep thinking required by reading. They are sooooo dumb and need to be entertained by EVERYTHING. They can't even handle a boring book that's full of great points!" Well played, Postman. I was like, "Well, not me! I'm gonna read this whole boring book just to prove I can do it."
Sure, there are nuggets of truth. But also... calm down.
It did make me think about the world of entertainment we live in today and how we got here.
But it also never mentioned slavery during the first few chapters which felt like a major oversight if we're making claims that basically everyone had access to texts, and thus, we were the most educated society in history. I kept wondering, "Is he going to make a connection between the lack of slaves' access to texts and their ability to engage in important national conversations?" No. Glossed right over that part so he could continue his analysis of how television is making us absolute zombies who are incapable of critical thinking.
He also made claims about how television negatively influences education and curriculum that (I believe) have not come to fruition since the book's publication.
In the end, I felt like he was just an old-timer that was pissed and shaking his fist at the changing world.
One thing I definitely did agree with was his proposed solution: Let teachers fix the problem of understanding the impacts of television because (as he notes) teachers are ultimately who we turn to whenever there is a societal problem that needs fixing. Thanks for putting that on my shoulders. Ha! (For what it's worth, I do think the world of education has risen to this demand.)
Anyhow, I wouldn't recommend it unless you're looking for a sleep aid.
trapdoor's review against another edition
3.0
audiobook. (kinda funny, i see the irony)
it was due like today so i listened to it all today and bro was spitting.
as in he was just speaking very quickly š
also i was running while i listened to chapters like 7-10 which made it a little harder to focus, when i listen to audiobooks i like to try and be doing minimal other things.
i like what he says about secular church on television and gatekeeping it as a religion bro, cause like those people are scam artists anyways.
that being said he reffers to african ameircans as āblacksā
which was quite off putting i understand it was made in ā85 but like, you wrote this down?
he says things that are just wrong like on a real nitty gritty sort of it, , and im sort of paraphrasing he but says [on the subject of people who dont want to promote like the ābest appearanceā of themselves]he says that like those people either donāt exist or are like, sick & twisted? i disagree with either of those sentiments
everything else he says about like the paper and the telly is cool though
it was due like today so i listened to it all today and bro was spitting.
as in he was just speaking very quickly š
also i was running while i listened to chapters like 7-10 which made it a little harder to focus, when i listen to audiobooks i like to try and be doing minimal other things.
i like what he says about secular church on television and gatekeeping it as a religion bro, cause like those people are scam artists anyways.
that being said he reffers to african ameircans as āblacksā
which was quite off putting i understand it was made in ā85 but like, you wrote this down?
he says things that are just wrong like on a real nitty gritty sort of it, , and im sort of paraphrasing he but says [on the subject of people who dont want to promote like the ābest appearanceā of themselves]he says that like those people either donāt exist or are like, sick & twisted? i disagree with either of those sentiments
everything else he says about like the paper and the telly is cool though
clubizarre's review against another edition
4.0
Fun read. I read it so long ago, it's hard to completely remember it though.
nerdofdoom's review against another edition
4.0
I decided to read this after reading "Empire of Illusion" by Chris Hedges in which it is heavily quoted. I thought it was pretty good, but for me personally there were no profound revelations here. But I am already a veteran at cynicism toward television and pop culture in general. It was short an sweet and definitely had some food for thought.
The one I was wondering throughout is what he would have to say about twitter, Facebook, and their ilk those being, in my mind, the current extreme of just what this book is warning us about.
The one I was wondering throughout is what he would have to say about twitter, Facebook, and their ilk those being, in my mind, the current extreme of just what this book is warning us about.
skyallred's review against another edition
4.0
Written in ā85, yet still powerfully relevant. One of the most cynical takes on TV consumption Iāve read. While I donāt quite subscribe to Postmanās degree of cynicism about all TV, I still highly recommend it, if for no other reason than to challenge yourself and society at large over how much TV and how little print we consume as a culture. Even if you think you are aware of all the negative consequences of TV consumption on our society, Postman will probably make you realize you havenāt taken them seriously enough. Very self-reflective and thought-provoking read, even for someone like me who already doesnāt consume much TV compared to most.
elianachow's review against another edition
4.0
Found here in these pages are all the reasons why I never thought I would be working in marketing.
mattgoldberg's review against another edition
3.0
About to start reading Amusing Ourselves to Death with equal parts excitement and dread. I live and breathe entertainment, and this book may tell me that I've been wasting my life. Or it may give me a new perspective that provides me with a more thoughtful and present approach to my personal and professional activities. I feel like I already agree with Postman to some extent, and after reading the forward by his son, Andrew (Neil Postman passed away in 2003), my current thinking is that while I will respect some of Postman's points, I will also disagree with some on the grounds that entertainment is only mindless if we refuse to be mindful. That is to say that we can be thoughtless consumers, or we can thoughtfully approach what we're consuming no matter how simple it may appear.
However, I'm already on edge for two reasons. First, the forward mentions that Sesame Street is bad for us, and to me and millions of others, Sesame Street is sacrosanct. It was entertainment but it was also an invaluable teaching tool. It helped kids learn words, numbers, and also compassion and manners. One of my Spanish teachers told us that Sesame Street helped to teach her English. That may sound a little silly, but there is good in that show, and I hope that the book doesn't dismiss outright.
Secondly, because the book was published in 1985, and even the forward was written in 2006, neither Postman nor his son could have predicted the rise of social networks. We now use EACH OTHER for our amusement. And that's what you're reading right now, and then you'll move on to the next thing. Furthermore, we're set to amuse other without even knowing it. We're what overheard and tweeted. We're what's shot with a camera phone and uploaded to YouTube. That's possibly more terrifying than anything Postman might write in his book.
---
Now that I've finished, I'll say that I had lots to say about the book, and thank goodness for Kindle annotations. I can't remember the last time I engaged so heavily with a book even though I disagreed strongly with the author numerous times throughout the text. It makes me wish I was back in a classroom setting where this book and others like it could be discussed. As it stands, I write into the void of the Internet where this record is more for me than it is for anyone else.
However, I'm already on edge for two reasons. First, the forward mentions that Sesame Street is bad for us, and to me and millions of others, Sesame Street is sacrosanct. It was entertainment but it was also an invaluable teaching tool. It helped kids learn words, numbers, and also compassion and manners. One of my Spanish teachers told us that Sesame Street helped to teach her English. That may sound a little silly, but there is good in that show, and I hope that the book doesn't dismiss outright.
Secondly, because the book was published in 1985, and even the forward was written in 2006, neither Postman nor his son could have predicted the rise of social networks. We now use EACH OTHER for our amusement. And that's what you're reading right now, and then you'll move on to the next thing. Furthermore, we're set to amuse other without even knowing it. We're what overheard and tweeted. We're what's shot with a camera phone and uploaded to YouTube. That's possibly more terrifying than anything Postman might write in his book.
---
Now that I've finished, I'll say that I had lots to say about the book, and thank goodness for Kindle annotations. I can't remember the last time I engaged so heavily with a book even though I disagreed strongly with the author numerous times throughout the text. It makes me wish I was back in a classroom setting where this book and others like it could be discussed. As it stands, I write into the void of the Internet where this record is more for me than it is for anyone else.
kochella's review against another edition
5.0
As I sit down to write this, President Trump has just described Frederick Douglass as "someone who has done a terrific job that is being recognized by more and more people." (February 1, 2017).
Frederick Douglass was an African American abolitionist, writer, and reformer who died in 1895. Apparently, the President of the United States has no idea who Frederick Douglass was, since he is referring to Douglass in the present tense.
I have been struggling to understand how Trump got elected. Not just because I disagree with his political views, but because he is, quite frankly, woefully uneducated. Not only is he woefully uneducated, but he apparently also has no desire to educate himself now that he is President - not even with intelligence briefings.
What happened? How has this country gone from Founding Fathers who were intellectual giants - including Jefferson, Hamilton, and Madison - to someone who literally cannot be bothered to read a book? And why, exactly, does so much of this country find this to be a perfectly acceptable state of affairs?
Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death" offers a deeply compelling thesis as to how and why America has slouched so pitifully towards ignorance. As he puts it, "We might even say that America was founded by intellectuals, from which it has taken us two centuries and a communications revolution to recover."
Postman argues that in the early America of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the printed word had a monopoly on discourse, attention, and intellect because that was all people had. Most Americans never even laid eyes on their leaders - they knew them only by their printed words. That is to say, Americans only knew their leaders by their public positions, their arguments, and their knowledge as codified by the printed word.
Today we don't know our leaders by their words so much as by their faces - thanks to the modern monopoly of visual media - the television and internet. In early America, participation in public life required the capacity to negotiate the printed word and mature citizenship was not conceivable without sophisticated literacy. Now? Who cares. As long as you look good on TV and can speak in easy-to-understand 30 second sound bites, you're good. In fact, Postman writes, modern public discourse does not (and really cannot) appeal to the public's reason as it did in early America, because the disjointed nature of television does not allow for such a sustained level of discussion. Can you imagine a modern American cheerfully listening to a presidential debate for between 5 to 7 hours (as they did in Lincoln's time)? Can you imagine them doing it in person, without pictures of any kind?
Visual media has transformed us from a typographical and deeply literate society to one in which we are dazzled by a constant stream of flashing pictures and music that instructs us how to feel. There needn't be much coherence in this visual world because we are endlessly entertained by it and it is so adept at eliciting our emotions. Visual media has such a monopoly in modern America that many Americans don't end up voting for leaders whose knowledge and reasoning appeal to them, but for those who make them feel a certain way.
This book was written in 1985, so obviously it didn't discuss the most recent U.S. presidential election. Its theories, however, were easily extended. It explained (to me, at least) why so many Trump voters cannot articulate the political philosophies that convinced them to vote for him, but rather they point out how he made them feel. Trump never even fully articulated any of his political philosophies during the campaign. But people had seen him be "a successful business man" on a reality TV show in which he hired and fired people (even celebrities!), he obviously has lots of money, and his stump speeches appealed to their feelings of dissatisfaction with how the world had treated them - so they felt he must be a good leader who understood them. Many of Trump's voters also "didn't trust Hillary," although I rarely heard it explained why. The explanations I did hear almost always had less to do with her political philosophies, and everything to do with their feelings about her. A far cry from the intellectual discourse of eighteenth and nineteenth century America.
This was one of the most fascinating and illuminating books I have read in years. I believe it gave me an understanding of current events that I desperately wanted and needed.
Five massive stars.
An all-time favorite.
Most highly recommended.
Frederick Douglass was an African American abolitionist, writer, and reformer who died in 1895. Apparently, the President of the United States has no idea who Frederick Douglass was, since he is referring to Douglass in the present tense.
I have been struggling to understand how Trump got elected. Not just because I disagree with his political views, but because he is, quite frankly, woefully uneducated. Not only is he woefully uneducated, but he apparently also has no desire to educate himself now that he is President - not even with intelligence briefings.
What happened? How has this country gone from Founding Fathers who were intellectual giants - including Jefferson, Hamilton, and Madison - to someone who literally cannot be bothered to read a book? And why, exactly, does so much of this country find this to be a perfectly acceptable state of affairs?
Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death" offers a deeply compelling thesis as to how and why America has slouched so pitifully towards ignorance. As he puts it, "We might even say that America was founded by intellectuals, from which it has taken us two centuries and a communications revolution to recover."
Postman argues that in the early America of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the printed word had a monopoly on discourse, attention, and intellect because that was all people had. Most Americans never even laid eyes on their leaders - they knew them only by their printed words. That is to say, Americans only knew their leaders by their public positions, their arguments, and their knowledge as codified by the printed word.
Today we don't know our leaders by their words so much as by their faces - thanks to the modern monopoly of visual media - the television and internet. In early America, participation in public life required the capacity to negotiate the printed word and mature citizenship was not conceivable without sophisticated literacy. Now? Who cares. As long as you look good on TV and can speak in easy-to-understand 30 second sound bites, you're good. In fact, Postman writes, modern public discourse does not (and really cannot) appeal to the public's reason as it did in early America, because the disjointed nature of television does not allow for such a sustained level of discussion. Can you imagine a modern American cheerfully listening to a presidential debate for between 5 to 7 hours (as they did in Lincoln's time)? Can you imagine them doing it in person, without pictures of any kind?
Visual media has transformed us from a typographical and deeply literate society to one in which we are dazzled by a constant stream of flashing pictures and music that instructs us how to feel. There needn't be much coherence in this visual world because we are endlessly entertained by it and it is so adept at eliciting our emotions. Visual media has such a monopoly in modern America that many Americans don't end up voting for leaders whose knowledge and reasoning appeal to them, but for those who make them feel a certain way.
This book was written in 1985, so obviously it didn't discuss the most recent U.S. presidential election. Its theories, however, were easily extended. It explained (to me, at least) why so many Trump voters cannot articulate the political philosophies that convinced them to vote for him, but rather they point out how he made them feel. Trump never even fully articulated any of his political philosophies during the campaign. But people had seen him be "a successful business man" on a reality TV show in which he hired and fired people (even celebrities!), he obviously has lots of money, and his stump speeches appealed to their feelings of dissatisfaction with how the world had treated them - so they felt he must be a good leader who understood them. Many of Trump's voters also "didn't trust Hillary," although I rarely heard it explained why. The explanations I did hear almost always had less to do with her political philosophies, and everything to do with their feelings about her. A far cry from the intellectual discourse of eighteenth and nineteenth century America.
This was one of the most fascinating and illuminating books I have read in years. I believe it gave me an understanding of current events that I desperately wanted and needed.
Five massive stars.
An all-time favorite.
Most highly recommended.