Scan barcode
11corvus11's review against another edition
DNF at about 10% in. I am pretty sure I agree with her general thesis, but gave up when she described having a body as a "retarded siamese twin dragging along behind me, a hysteric, really." I'm all about self deprecation and negativity to a fault, but this was written in 2009 and multiple people including the author think using slurs is a good way to get this point across.
pekoegal's review against another edition
4.0
Interesting book. I would like to see an update from the author regarding the current era. It seems like there is some pretty good fodder for a follow-up on positive thinking and its effects.
seclement's review against another edition
4.0
This is a book in a similar vein of most pop sci books, but it is a well written and interesting one, on an important topic. Ehrenreich does a good job of mixing anecdote with evidence, although I must emphasise the "pop" in pop sci, as the referencing is in that vein and the anecdotes carry more weight than the evidence. But still, I think the thesis of this book is still pretty good - not flawless nor comprehensive, but an engaging and broad look at how "positivity" affects so many aspects of American life. Not just in terms of linking toxic positivity to topics that I had read a lot about like "the secret", capitalism, and wellness culture/aka "thinking yourself well" (which are covered), but also less covered elements, like in the field of psychology, Christian prosperity gospel, and the roots origins of American positive thinking. I would have liked more of the historic elements, and feel like Chapter 3 should have been fleshed out.
I did feel like the whole book was a bit shallow, however. In the introduction, she says something that was quite insightul, noting that positivity is not an American disposition but an ideology, and distinguishing between optimism and hope. I would have really liked her to god deeper into that, or at least tied that idea to her conclusion.
It's also a bit of a funny read because it was written during/published just after the global financial crisis. I wonder how much worse it would be now - or would it be any different at all?
A good complement to this book that I enjoyed a bit more was [b:The Antidote: Happiness for People Who Can't Stand Positive Thinking|13721709|The Antidote Happiness for People Who Can't Stand Positive Thinking|Oliver Burkeman|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1389478401l/13721709._SX50_.jpg|19354514], but it is more about the personal than the systemic, which is why I say it's a complement rather than a replacement. But Ehrenreich only briefly touches on the idea of realistic optimism, which Burkeman goes into more deeply.
I liked this angle on positivity as a national ideology and how pervasive it is, however, and it's something I suspect other authors have written more about and maybe even more deeply.
I did feel like the whole book was a bit shallow, however. In the introduction, she says something that was quite insightul, noting that positivity is not an American disposition but an ideology, and distinguishing between optimism and hope. I would have really liked her to god deeper into that, or at least tied that idea to her conclusion.
It's also a bit of a funny read because it was written during/published just after the global financial crisis. I wonder how much worse it would be now - or would it be any different at all?
A good complement to this book that I enjoyed a bit more was [b:The Antidote: Happiness for People Who Can't Stand Positive Thinking|13721709|The Antidote Happiness for People Who Can't Stand Positive Thinking|Oliver Burkeman|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1389478401l/13721709._SX50_.jpg|19354514], but it is more about the personal than the systemic, which is why I say it's a complement rather than a replacement. But Ehrenreich only briefly touches on the idea of realistic optimism, which Burkeman goes into more deeply.
I liked this angle on positivity as a national ideology and how pervasive it is, however, and it's something I suspect other authors have written more about and maybe even more deeply.
subvino's review against another edition
4.0
This would be a 5-star rating if the book were 50-75 pages shorter. The beginning and end chapters were the most powerful, but the middle seemed very redundant at times. Still, very good book which I agree with wholeheartedly.
jazzcone's review against another edition
emotional
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.25
Content Warnings
Moderate: Cancer, Ableism, Religious bigotry, Medical content, Medical trauma, and Mental illness
sjgrodsky's review against another edition
4.0
Ehrenreich is a fantastic prose stylist, with a wicked sense of sarcasm. I so get how many of the privileged white males she interviewed might have felt her incisive intelligence as threat to their comfortable self image.
And I CERTAINLY get her complaints about the annoyingly cheerful attitudes of medical professionals. I got a taste of that when taking my father to endless appointments during the last few years of his life. That sugary “how are we DOING today?” made me want to reply with a few choice insults. But of course i could not alienate the nurse whose good will I might need later. I could only fume.
Ehrenreich does offer an answer to a question no other journalist has addressed. Remember the housing bubble of 2008-9, when so many people bought houses they could not afford?
I understood that buyers would buy more house than they could afford if allowed. But in a more normal environment, sober underwriters looked at your financial health and refused to loan. You weren’t allowed to buy more house than you could sustain.
But what changed, I wondered, so that mortgage lenders were willing to finance loans that were nonsense? Mortgage lenders did not suddenly forget all the analytical tests they had been applying for decades.
Ehrenreich thinks that mortgage lenders were infected with the same relentless optimism and “positive thinking” that she documents elsewhere. She blames positive thinking for the real estate bubble.
I think positive thinking is only partly to blame, responsible for perhaps 10 percent. The other 90 percent is that frequent culprit, greed, aided by irresponsibility.
Because it used to be that YourTown Bank would loan money to you. You worked hard and diligently paid back your four percent loan. The bank made money, the loan analyst was appreciated for a savvy decision, everyone was happy.
But when loan analysts became loan brokers, that changed. The broker made a commission when he sold a loan. The loan got packaged with thousands of others and sold to someone else. The loan analyst had no responsibility and every incentive to sell as many loans as possible, sensible or not.
The “don’t be negative” criticism was applied to those who were being responsible. It was a way of tamping down deserved criticism. But it wasn’t the cause of the real estate bubble.
And I CERTAINLY get her complaints about the annoyingly cheerful attitudes of medical professionals. I got a taste of that when taking my father to endless appointments during the last few years of his life. That sugary “how are we DOING today?” made me want to reply with a few choice insults. But of course i could not alienate the nurse whose good will I might need later. I could only fume.
Ehrenreich does offer an answer to a question no other journalist has addressed. Remember the housing bubble of 2008-9, when so many people bought houses they could not afford?
I understood that buyers would buy more house than they could afford if allowed. But in a more normal environment, sober underwriters looked at your financial health and refused to loan. You weren’t allowed to buy more house than you could sustain.
But what changed, I wondered, so that mortgage lenders were willing to finance loans that were nonsense? Mortgage lenders did not suddenly forget all the analytical tests they had been applying for decades.
Ehrenreich thinks that mortgage lenders were infected with the same relentless optimism and “positive thinking” that she documents elsewhere. She blames positive thinking for the real estate bubble.
I think positive thinking is only partly to blame, responsible for perhaps 10 percent. The other 90 percent is that frequent culprit, greed, aided by irresponsibility.
Because it used to be that YourTown Bank would loan money to you. You worked hard and diligently paid back your four percent loan. The bank made money, the loan analyst was appreciated for a savvy decision, everyone was happy.
But when loan analysts became loan brokers, that changed. The broker made a commission when he sold a loan. The loan got packaged with thousands of others and sold to someone else. The loan analyst had no responsibility and every incentive to sell as many loans as possible, sensible or not.
The “don’t be negative” criticism was applied to those who were being responsible. It was a way of tamping down deserved criticism. But it wasn’t the cause of the real estate bubble.
andrea_author's review against another edition
5.0
This book shows how positive thinking is not only the opposite of negative thinking—it's also the enemy of critical thinking. For example, the book argues that the Great Recession of 2008 resulted in part from business leaders moving toward a reliance on "intuition" rather than data. The book also presents evidence suggesting that the benefits of positive thinking have been exaggerated. In addition, it suggests that positive psychology promotes the status quo, arguing that we should work on improving our way of thinking rather than improving our circumstances.
This book is worth reading as a counterbalance to all the information about positive psychology promoted in the media and in the business world. Taken too far, positive thinking is simply another form of superstition.
This book is worth reading as a counterbalance to all the information about positive psychology promoted in the media and in the business world. Taken too far, positive thinking is simply another form of superstition.
hoboken's review against another edition
4.0
This is excellent. Well written, well researched, wide-ranging, also chilling. Went right to my antibizspeak heart.
sunshine608's review against another edition
4.0
When I saw this book I was immediately intrigued by an in-depth look into the psychology of positive thinking. I was a skeptic of things like "The Secret" and the prosperity theology that cause me to leave many a church, so a book like this was right up my alley.
I enjoyed learning about the history of the positive thinking movement and seeings its mark in places like religion, business and health care. Since the first chapter, I have not looked at Breast Cancer paraphernalia the same. At time I disagreed with Ms Ehrenreich, especially about her analysis of Cancer patients/survivors, but I also saw a lot of truth in the information presented.
Overall an enjoyable read I recommended to fans of Ehrenreich and those interested in Positive thinking
I enjoyed learning about the history of the positive thinking movement and seeings its mark in places like religion, business and health care. Since the first chapter, I have not looked at Breast Cancer paraphernalia the same. At time I disagreed with Ms Ehrenreich, especially about her analysis of Cancer patients/survivors, but I also saw a lot of truth in the information presented.
Overall an enjoyable read I recommended to fans of Ehrenreich and those interested in Positive thinking
lyrareadsbooks's review against another edition
2.0
I wanted to like this book so much more. I think the author is onto something linking notable strands of magical thinking and optimism with the economic crises and rise of fundamentalism at the turn of the 21st century, but this book is a bit of a mess.
Noticeable cherry-picking of history put me off early on. The author calls the trend a discredit to Enlightenment thinking and yet optimism was part of that same process (and already being subject to Voltaire's ridicule).
Given the length and subject , this book was surprisingly shallow, but that can happen when picking the events and ideas that best suit a hypothesis. Also the frequent repetition of the same few supporting points left this reader suspicious the horse was beaten, dead, buried and beaten again for good (or bad) measure.
I know why this book didn't work for me and yet I have encouraged a few people to read it because they have seen this type of optimism in action and this provocative the argument did spark my curiosity.
Noticeable cherry-picking of history put me off early on. The author calls the trend a discredit to Enlightenment thinking and yet optimism was part of that same process (and already being subject to Voltaire's ridicule).
Given the length and subject , this book was surprisingly shallow, but that can happen when picking the events and ideas that best suit a hypothesis. Also the frequent repetition of the same few supporting points left this reader suspicious the horse was beaten, dead, buried and beaten again for good (or bad) measure.
I know why this book didn't work for me and yet I have encouraged a few people to read it because they have seen this type of optimism in action and this provocative the argument did spark my curiosity.