Scan barcode
jsoakes's review against another edition
2.0
I'm conflicted on this one. I think the premise was decent: current philosophies that promote nationalism, religious fanaticism, white supremacy, misogyny, and other perspectives that isolate the "other" and promote anger and violence as means of control are not new or novel, but are actually descendant from ideas born in the enlightenment and rehashed a hundred times since then. On the surface, this makes sense and seems reasonable. The supporting information, though, felt rushed and jumpy. It was hard to follow the logic from how one event or idea gave birth to another and the overall work felt jumbled. It may take a re-read to really understand the finer points that were trying to be made, but I'm not really willing to give it the needed effort.
wmilam's review against another edition
4.0
An elegant, expansive overview of our (post)modern heritage of the past few centuries of global political and philosophical thought. Don't agree with all of the conclusions, but they're well-argued.
boithorn's review against another edition
3.0
A really compelling and ambitious philosophical history of how the Enlightenment reverberated forward to the present day, leaving a wake of destruction and unrest behind.
Mishra's primary argument (as I understand it) is that Voltaire, in his promotion of a liberal and capitalist society with elites who are worthy of ruling because they are elites, rankled Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who believed that increased inequality and rootless cosmopolitanism would only result in greater ressentiment among those left out of the prosperity (while still having to witness it passing between elites). Voltaire and the societies that adopted a classically liberal model of rule did not have a viable answer to this, leading to anti-elite uprisings and increased authoritarian protection of their states throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, but Rousseau's doctrines were also taken in by many thinkers and political operatives who in turn inspired authoritarian and fascist rule.
I don't necessarily agree with every point that Mishra makes in this book (for instance: Mishra doesn't do much to distinguish between anti-colonial violent resistance in India and Algeria and the present day seemingly violence of ISIS, characterizations of Bakunin as the main figurehead of anarchist theory are really flat, the end of the book details the 'negative solidarity' produced by social media but doesn't acknowledge the possibility for 'positive solidarity'), and I don't think it's well-organized, but it's a page-to-page barnburner of a history. If you have a working knowledge of post-Enlightenment philosophy or you just want to learn more about how increased globalization has led to the viral dissemination of ideas, this is an interesting book to check out.
Mishra's primary argument (as I understand it) is that Voltaire, in his promotion of a liberal and capitalist society with elites who are worthy of ruling because they are elites, rankled Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who believed that increased inequality and rootless cosmopolitanism would only result in greater ressentiment among those left out of the prosperity (while still having to witness it passing between elites). Voltaire and the societies that adopted a classically liberal model of rule did not have a viable answer to this, leading to anti-elite uprisings and increased authoritarian protection of their states throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, but Rousseau's doctrines were also taken in by many thinkers and political operatives who in turn inspired authoritarian and fascist rule.
I don't necessarily agree with every point that Mishra makes in this book (for instance: Mishra doesn't do much to distinguish between anti-colonial violent resistance in India and Algeria and the present day seemingly violence of ISIS, characterizations of Bakunin as the main figurehead of anarchist theory are really flat, the end of the book details the 'negative solidarity' produced by social media but doesn't acknowledge the possibility for 'positive solidarity'), and I don't think it's well-organized, but it's a page-to-page barnburner of a history. If you have a working knowledge of post-Enlightenment philosophy or you just want to learn more about how increased globalization has led to the viral dissemination of ideas, this is an interesting book to check out.
zachkuhn's review against another edition
5.0
Uses Rousseau and Nietzsche's idea of "resentiment" to explain both terrorism and Trumpism. Worth the price for the epilogue alone.
mylogicisfuzzy's review against another edition
3.0
I thought the beginning and the end very good. The rest, I had some problems with. It is as if the Enlightenment was born in a vacuum with a lot of 'firsts' and no roots. For example: "a pattern established by Russia - the first country where autocrats (specifically Peter and Catherine, as Mishra explains elsewhere in the book) decreed a tryst with modernity". One could argue that Henry VIII's break with the Catholic Church was an example of autocrat's tryst with modernity too and that Peter/ Russia was not the first. I found there was too much against Voltaire and too much of Rousseau. It got repetitive.
A lot of it lacked context, sweeping statements needed to be qualified. German Romantics chapter annoyed me a lot because Mishra failed to say that when Herder wrote about German common cultural identity, there was no such thing as German state, he only mentions this much later on. After the defeat of Napoleon, some countries he conquered and imposed the hated Code Napoleon on (Mishra mentions the hatred of it) kept elements of the Code because these worked for them. Saying this would not have justified Napoleon - Mishra often presents things in black and white and they were a little more grey. Also, at one point, when talking about repressive Russia, he claims that serfdom was abolished in most of Europe in thirteenth century - no it wasn't, at least not officially, until Napoleon (again). I don't mind selective use of sources but these should be qualified or put into context. Mishra repeatedly failed to do this, which is why I can't rate this book higher. He also doesn't offer suggestions on how to find/ where to look for solutions. Nevertheless, his main argument is good and timely.
A lot of it lacked context, sweeping statements needed to be qualified. German Romantics chapter annoyed me a lot because Mishra failed to say that when Herder wrote about German common cultural identity, there was no such thing as German state, he only mentions this much later on. After the defeat of Napoleon, some countries he conquered and imposed the hated Code Napoleon on (Mishra mentions the hatred of it) kept elements of the Code because these worked for them. Saying this would not have justified Napoleon - Mishra often presents things in black and white and they were a little more grey. Also, at one point, when talking about repressive Russia, he claims that serfdom was abolished in most of Europe in thirteenth century - no it wasn't, at least not officially, until Napoleon (again). I don't mind selective use of sources but these should be qualified or put into context. Mishra repeatedly failed to do this, which is why I can't rate this book higher. He also doesn't offer suggestions on how to find/ where to look for solutions. Nevertheless, his main argument is good and timely.
ninabrown's review against another edition
5.0
I wish this man was my history teacher at school! History was always so terribly boring for me. "Old" history seemed irrelevant, "new" history - that of XX century - was packed with lies and propaganda in communist Poland where I went to school. Still, I have a good memory, and boring as the classes were, I found that this book brought a lot of half remembered material back to surface.
"Age of Anger" weaves effortlessly back and forth through world history from about XVII century all the way to Cirque du Trump. Pankaj Mishra is not only very well read but it is obvious that he gives a lot of thought and analysis to what he ingests, from historical facts, philosophical treatises, fiction, poetry to news and social media. He follows concepts and ideas rather than timelines, and I find this approach logical and easy to understand in a global, holistic way.
I am glad I've read this book, but it left me depressed and chilled to the bone. Pankaj doesn't offer any conclusions per se, but presents the facts in such a way that it is very hard to maintain any illusions of enlightement, progress, democracy, freedom; all these concepts we so love to believe in that we became blind to the cruel price tag that is always there. The title is well chosen. The book is well written. I will certainly look up his other books.
"Age of Anger" weaves effortlessly back and forth through world history from about XVII century all the way to Cirque du Trump. Pankaj Mishra is not only very well read but it is obvious that he gives a lot of thought and analysis to what he ingests, from historical facts, philosophical treatises, fiction, poetry to news and social media. He follows concepts and ideas rather than timelines, and I find this approach logical and easy to understand in a global, holistic way.
I am glad I've read this book, but it left me depressed and chilled to the bone. Pankaj doesn't offer any conclusions per se, but presents the facts in such a way that it is very hard to maintain any illusions of enlightement, progress, democracy, freedom; all these concepts we so love to believe in that we became blind to the cruel price tag that is always there. The title is well chosen. The book is well written. I will certainly look up his other books.
lnatal's review against another edition
4.0
From BBC Radio 4 - Book of the week:
In a ground-breaking new analysis, Pankaj Mishra traces the tangled roots of hatreds and nationalisms across the world.
Inspired by Hindu nationalists in his own country, the rise of the so-called Islamic State, the emergence of Donald Trump as a candidate for President, as well as Brexit, the author attempts to re-examine the divided modern world.
Mishra looks at historical events from the industrial revolution to the French revolution, from the writings of philosophers to the end of the Cold War. Indeed, at the end of the Cold War, there was a belief that the global capitalist economy would alleviate ethnic and religious differences to usher in prosperity and peace. This belief, he states, now lies in tatters, with no alternative in sight, and with economic power shifting from the West. Meanwhile, the IMF suggests that emerging economies will take much longer to catch up economically with the West than was previously believed.
Further, Mishra looks at nationalism, alienation, xenophobia, the 'lone wolf' and the pack behind him, domestic terrorism and the frustration and resentment both aimed at the West and from those in the West who are alienated.
He introduces us to the people at the heart of much of the action as we discover the causes and consequences of their beliefs and their actions.
Read by Pankaj Mishra
Produced by David Roper
A Heavy Entertainment production for BBC Radio 4.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08fll1l
In a ground-breaking new analysis, Pankaj Mishra traces the tangled roots of hatreds and nationalisms across the world.
Inspired by Hindu nationalists in his own country, the rise of the so-called Islamic State, the emergence of Donald Trump as a candidate for President, as well as Brexit, the author attempts to re-examine the divided modern world.
Mishra looks at historical events from the industrial revolution to the French revolution, from the writings of philosophers to the end of the Cold War. Indeed, at the end of the Cold War, there was a belief that the global capitalist economy would alleviate ethnic and religious differences to usher in prosperity and peace. This belief, he states, now lies in tatters, with no alternative in sight, and with economic power shifting from the West. Meanwhile, the IMF suggests that emerging economies will take much longer to catch up economically with the West than was previously believed.
Further, Mishra looks at nationalism, alienation, xenophobia, the 'lone wolf' and the pack behind him, domestic terrorism and the frustration and resentment both aimed at the West and from those in the West who are alienated.
He introduces us to the people at the heart of much of the action as we discover the causes and consequences of their beliefs and their actions.
Read by Pankaj Mishra
Produced by David Roper
A Heavy Entertainment production for BBC Radio 4.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08fll1l
ndsr's review against another edition
5.0
An incredible history of ideas demonstrating that the excesses of our present geopolitical moment—such as Trump, Brexit, ISIS—are not only predictable reactions to the development of global capitalism, but were in fact predicted by critics of Enlightenment rationalism, industrialism, and globalism. It is rare to find such a wide-ranging and explanatory account of the present global situation, as well as more specific analyses of the United States, Europe, India, and the Levant. It is also rare to find an author who writes at such a high level with so much respect for the intellect of the reader.
This book is perhaps the first important publication of the Trump era, and even those uninterested in the primary narrative of ideas in the book should seek out and read the introduction and epilogue. An absolute masterpiece of the form.
This book is perhaps the first important publication of the Trump era, and even those uninterested in the primary narrative of ideas in the book should seek out and read the introduction and epilogue. An absolute masterpiece of the form.
xalaila's review against another edition
5.0
Absolutely must-read for anyone wishing to understand current affairs in terms of why is populism in vogue? What is the appeal of ISIS? Are these truly modern phenomena?
Philosophical and insightful, Pankaj Mishra is definitely a modern philosopher.
Philosophical and insightful, Pankaj Mishra is definitely a modern philosopher.
lmdo's review against another edition
1.0
It could just be that I'm not that smart, and that's why I couldn't read this book. I made attempts to start about six times and just could not ever really process it. At points, I thought I understood, but that would no longer be the case a couple of pages later.