Scan barcode
A review by snow_phie
Dedicated: The Case for Commitment in an Age of Infinite Browsing by Pete Davis
2.0
[Audiobook] Dedicated was an odd audiobook experience, at times compelling and surprising but overall mostly frustrating.
I do agree with the overall message - that in a culture of infinite options, we increasingly find ourselves in situations where we don't have to or want to choose, which can lead to dissatisfaction and pointless attempts to seek constant novelty.
That message alone was the main value for me, prompting a personal reflection on dedication - to what or whom am I committing to in my life and why? There are few passages on social media too (grand posturing, immediate reactions, seen as an end in itself), which resonated. And I enjoyed hearing about social change stories and the activists behind them.
My problems with the book:
1) It wants to be a book about social change, but does so through an individualist lens which fails to grasp any of the complex dynamics behind change, beyond an individual's ability to dedicate or commit.
2) It claims that the culture of infinite choices is the mainstream culture vs dedication as a "counter culture" but offers little evidence for it. In fact the examples he uses throughout the book makes a strong case for a dedication culture very much well and alive. E.g. People still marry and have children, people do continue to learn and hone their crafts, activists are fighting causes for years on end.
3) It's trying sooo hard to be a "counter culture", to pitch itself as the underdog and to rebrand things that already exists to fit this narrative. The rebranding is quite cringe - long haul heroes, dedication as patriotic, activists as reformers, entrepreneurs as builders. I eye rolled a lot.
4) He makes the case for committing to things - relationships, jobs- because that will make you a long haul hero and the depth you get from commitment will be so very rewarding. At no point does he factor in the reasons why more options benefit so many groups who aren't white middle class men. Not everyone can or wants to commit to a job in workplaces where racism, sexism and ableism are rife. Where there are no structures in place allowing for childcare. Not everyone wants to commit to marriage and children when the vast majority of women still do the bulk of the care work and take a pay cut over their lifetime. You can't make a case for dedication with acknowledging that doing so isn't possible or beneficial to a large number of people who are systematically disadvantaged.
In a nutshell: sure the book has some interesting elements. But it tries so so hard to be about social change and movement building without having any of the experience or understanding of what it takes beyond "dedication".
I do agree with the overall message - that in a culture of infinite options, we increasingly find ourselves in situations where we don't have to or want to choose, which can lead to dissatisfaction and pointless attempts to seek constant novelty.
That message alone was the main value for me, prompting a personal reflection on dedication - to what or whom am I committing to in my life and why? There are few passages on social media too (grand posturing, immediate reactions, seen as an end in itself), which resonated. And I enjoyed hearing about social change stories and the activists behind them.
My problems with the book:
1) It wants to be a book about social change, but does so through an individualist lens which fails to grasp any of the complex dynamics behind change, beyond an individual's ability to dedicate or commit.
2) It claims that the culture of infinite choices is the mainstream culture vs dedication as a "counter culture" but offers little evidence for it. In fact the examples he uses throughout the book makes a strong case for a dedication culture very much well and alive. E.g. People still marry and have children, people do continue to learn and hone their crafts, activists are fighting causes for years on end.
3) It's trying sooo hard to be a "counter culture", to pitch itself as the underdog and to rebrand things that already exists to fit this narrative. The rebranding is quite cringe - long haul heroes, dedication as patriotic, activists as reformers, entrepreneurs as builders. I eye rolled a lot.
4) He makes the case for committing to things - relationships, jobs- because that will make you a long haul hero and the depth you get from commitment will be so very rewarding. At no point does he factor in the reasons why more options benefit so many groups who aren't white middle class men. Not everyone can or wants to commit to a job in workplaces where racism, sexism and ableism are rife. Where there are no structures in place allowing for childcare. Not everyone wants to commit to marriage and children when the vast majority of women still do the bulk of the care work and take a pay cut over their lifetime. You can't make a case for dedication with acknowledging that doing so isn't possible or beneficial to a large number of people who are systematically disadvantaged.
In a nutshell: sure the book has some interesting elements. But it tries so so hard to be about social change and movement building without having any of the experience or understanding of what it takes beyond "dedication".