Scan barcode
tunawidow's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
ajmcwhinney's review
4.0
I want to like this book more than I do. It makes a lot of points and claims I find implicitly compelling, but often fails to unpack these points and claims, to the point where I would feel nervous citing them in my own work or even in a conversation. I do take issue with Han's conception of how class operates in neoliberal society, even though I know what he's attempting to get at — having just come off One-Dimensional Man by Herbert Marcuse, there is an eerie similarity between Han and Marcuse's claims about technology, and Han doesn't cite Marcuse once. This is a shame, because I find Marcuse's explanation of the collapse of displays of class antagonism much more fleshed-out and compelling, and it would have been a good foundation for Han to build his points around psychopolitics.
Alongside these few dubious claims, the book fumbles around a bit with poor organization — as well as a few analogies that don't quite work as well as Han wants them to — when it comes to explaining the difference between Han's concept of psychopolitics and Foucault's concept of biopolitics, which he is critiquing. It was frustrating to get through these chapters, which could have been more succinctly written and then expanded upon in places where he makes claims that need more scholarship.
The book does get much more compelling after the clunky theoretical start. I appreciate the work on "Big Data" and "Emotional Capitalism" Han does (the chapter on Emotional Capitalism is probably my favourite). The conclusion is a bit goofy and seems much more like an academic flourish and flex than an actual solution to the problems Han describes, which is unfortunate.
Despite all my qualms, there are absolutely a few great gems of thought in here that deserve books in their own right, and I would love to see Han write a huge book on any of the topics touched on in this long essay.
Alongside these few dubious claims, the book fumbles around a bit with poor organization — as well as a few analogies that don't quite work as well as Han wants them to — when it comes to explaining the difference between Han's concept of psychopolitics and Foucault's concept of biopolitics, which he is critiquing. It was frustrating to get through these chapters, which could have been more succinctly written and then expanded upon in places where he makes claims that need more scholarship.
The book does get much more compelling after the clunky theoretical start. I appreciate the work on "Big Data" and "Emotional Capitalism" Han does (the chapter on Emotional Capitalism is probably my favourite). The conclusion is a bit goofy and seems much more like an academic flourish and flex than an actual solution to the problems Han describes, which is unfortunate.
Despite all my qualms, there are absolutely a few great gems of thought in here that deserve books in their own right, and I would love to see Han write a huge book on any of the topics touched on in this long essay.
weppenstolf's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
1.0
Han is an imposter and a capitalist realist par excellence. His essay(s) is/are unoriginal and poorly structured. His writing style is one of constant, rather superficial, punchlines, usually wild claims that he doesn’t bother to substantiate. He is consistently disrespectful towards the authors he references; those whose ideas he appropriates and those whose research he trashes to create the illusion that his bs is more accurate. Better read Foucault, Deleuze, Fisher, and the likes, from whom Han derives most of 'his' ideas.
eligutkowski's review against another edition
4.0
para releer y analizar muchas veces. probablemente lo relea en unos años o después de haber cursado filosofia. imperdible si queres deprimirte un poco sobre el estado del mundo o de tu país
casparb's review
I like the way Han operates he's hugely given to his sources - a lovely chapter toward the end of this dedicated to hegel's Science of Logic but a Lot of this text is, maybe a little like Agamben, about extending or confronting Foucault/biopolitics (with a much-needed appreciation for Deleuze's Postscript on Societies of Control). i'd call it a sound argument, though tentatively. all the same it's a very short and very effective text & would recommend to most people. I think he's accessible