Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.58 AVERAGE
3.58 AVERAGE
Culture geek Chuck Klosterman discusses the figure of the villain in American culture. Why are we so in love with the bad? Why do we forget the good and vilify the ugly? Why must we be so in love with gossip, controversy, and hate? He starts with the dastardly snide and sinister man who tied women to railroad tracks. (Okay, there wasn't any one person who did that...unless your talking about a comic or melodrama...And the real incidences of railroad track tie-ups are rare.) Klosterman follows the discussion through Rock and sports stars and yes, of course, OJ and yes, of course, Hitler. (Why has Hitler taken the place of the devil when there are so many other evil dictators out there? Do you even know what Stalin looks like? What about Pol Pot?)
The book is interesting, but Klosterman is a little too self-reflexive and his voice...oh, my...It's not evil. It's just cloying.
The book is interesting, but Klosterman is a little too self-reflexive and his voice...oh, my...It's not evil. It's just cloying.
funny
informative
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
Having just finished “The Nineties” and feeling confounded by its lack of resemblance to the free-wheeling writing I’d associated with Klosterman, I grabbed “We Wear the Black Hat” to see if I was misremembering his work. I was pleased to find that this collection had the goods.
One essay in particular, that examines the Clinton sex scandal while folding in “Basic Instinct,” Ted Bundy, Wilt Chamberlain, and even a nod to Trent Reznor and Tori Amos, captured everything that “The Nineties” could have been. There’s fresh takes on familiar topics, with the right amount of authorial self-effacement. It held up, even with the two decades that have passed since its publication.
One essay in particular, that examines the Clinton sex scandal while folding in “Basic Instinct,” Ted Bundy, Wilt Chamberlain, and even a nod to Trent Reznor and Tori Amos, captured everything that “The Nineties” could have been. There’s fresh takes on familiar topics, with the right amount of authorial self-effacement. It held up, even with the two decades that have passed since its publication.
I liked this book, but what can I say? I like Klosterman's kinda pretentious pop culture focused rhetoric. If you don't, you won't.
I think there are some interesting things to think about here, especially in the midst of our current male anti-hero worshipping era. Lots of culturally significant entertainment revolves around the idea of morality, is it finite or flexible, and Klosterman's specific examples are fun to bat around.
I think there are some interesting things to think about here, especially in the midst of our current male anti-hero worshipping era. Lots of culturally significant entertainment revolves around the idea of morality, is it finite or flexible, and Klosterman's specific examples are fun to bat around.
as with everything that Chuck writes, i find his perspective to be wholly unique and love that he pushes himself to see things from as many sides as possible. it is interesting to dissect the concept of villany, the bad guy and what we associate with it and why. i love chuck when he is writing about anything, fiction included, but i especially love when he stretches entirely out of his pop culture commentary (which is how i fell in love with his writing) and examines broad ideas and breaks them down in to digestible pieces. he is truly one of the most innovative writers of our time.
I don't know if this is an unusual book or only an unusual book for me to read. Either way, I found it unusual yet thoroughly delightful. The author is a very smart guy who knows way too much about music, sports, politics, and pop culture and draws fascinating (and very funny) conclusions about how they apply to the concept of villainy. Based on this book, I plan to read some of his previous books as well.
Not his best, but definitely some compelling arguments where we as a society place our animosity toward certain entities such as Joe Paterno, O.J. Simpson, Perez Hilton and (to a less debate) Adolf Hitler.
I was really excited to read this book, but I think that was due to having a fundamental misconception on what the book was about. Because it's not really about the popular concept of villainy or the antihero (I think the word antihero was mentioned more on the book jacket than within the pages) from the 1970s to the present. I should say that this book will probably be enjoyable for men born in the 60s or 70s, but for a girl born in the late 90s it was a miss. It's not just the casual references to things I had to look up, but also the dismissive tone Klosterman seemed to take on whenever he wrote about women. He also had a tendency to state his own opinions as facts, with no support or explanation, which was very annoying because it made his following argument meaningless.
The final chapter begins with the statement: "writing about other people is a form of writing about oneself." Which I think is probably true, for most people at least. The problem is that it never seemed like Klosterman was writing about other people, instead it always seemed to be about himself, which is not the book I was looking to read.
All in all, the book was a quick read with many amusing references and quips. I wouldn't recommend it, but I don't regret reading it.
Also, I really wish Klosterman would use footnotes instead of bracketing his asides.
The final chapter begins with the statement: "writing about other people is a form of writing about oneself." Which I think is probably true, for most people at least. The problem is that it never seemed like Klosterman was writing about other people, instead it always seemed to be about himself, which is not the book I was looking to read.
All in all, the book was a quick read with many amusing references and quips. I wouldn't recommend it, but I don't regret reading it.
Also, I really wish Klosterman would use footnotes instead of bracketing his asides.
Such a fun read. It made be think about why I truly hate Joe Buck.
This is the first Klosterman book I have read, and it was fun, and I will read others. My favorite essay was the one on the rise and fall of The Diceman.
But the Preface is just so much blather - some kind of BS about "presentation" that should take up a few volumes of discussion rather than a couple lines. Kind of reminds me of the people who used to discuss the deeper meaning of The Matrix. Seriously. And often in the book he just makes these wide ranging statements w/ nothing to back them up.
Enjoyable, and nice that each chapter can be read on its own, so you can dip in to it here and there and whenever you want.
But the Preface is just so much blather - some kind of BS about "presentation" that should take up a few volumes of discussion rather than a couple lines. Kind of reminds me of the people who used to discuss the deeper meaning of The Matrix. Seriously. And often in the book he just makes these wide ranging statements w/ nothing to back them up.
Enjoyable, and nice that each chapter can be read on its own, so you can dip in to it here and there and whenever you want.
Once again, Chuck manages to strike a good one with this read. I was pretty fascinated by his ability to keep it in line and pretty well in tune with his theme.