Take a photo of a barcode or cover
nacarat 's review for:
The Kingdom of Speech
by Tom Wolfe
I should say before I begin, that this is a very Tom Wolfe book. Well, I say book, but really it's a very long essay, more akin to a selection from "Hooking Up" than "From Our House to Bauhaus". But given his status as an octogenarian...
Anyway, I say this is a very Tom Wolfe book because, like all of Tom Wolfe's books, it's focused on puncturing all the stupid ideas people like to profess because it makes them look smarter - in this case, the idea that language is an evolutionary process - and in a way, the idea of evolution in general. He does this by focusing on two figures of science, one living and one dead: Noam Chomsky and Charles Darwin. Noam Chomsky - well, what can one say about him? Wolfe only points out the obvious, which is that 50 years after his promulgation on the theory of universal grammar, none of Chomsky's linguistic predictions have been borne out, even as imaging and scanning technology delves deeper into the brain. It's not heresy to point out Chomsky is glorified more for his political and philosophical opinions than on any objective review of his work.
As for Darwin, another historical figure who has been elevated to an unseemly height, Wolfe is also not in error in pointing out the whole incestuous, class-bound structure of the English scientific establishment of the 19th century, nor is he wrong in pointing out that Darwin was not really positing a scientific theory so much as a replacement creation myth - a just-so story, as Wolfe pithily notes. In truth, he's rather restrained in his criticism - the Wolfe of even 20 years ago could be significantly harsher to such figures, so limiting his mocking to Darwin's ideas, and also his hypochondria strikes me as restrained.
I suppose if this book has a weakness, I would say it was the sad lack of elaboration on Mendel as a response to Darwin, just as he chose Everett as a response/reaction to Chomsky. I think the book could have been significantly stronger if he had done that - currently the half devoted to Darwin feels a little light compared to the half of the book compared to Chomsky and Everett. But Mendell didn't really address language in his work on heredity, which is probably why it was left out.
As for the ending chapter where Wolfe talks about his own theory of language - well, I don't take it too seriously, but I doubt Wolfe does either. After all, he's just some guy - why would you listen to his ideas about linguistics? Which I think, in the end, is rather the point.
Anyway, I say this is a very Tom Wolfe book because, like all of Tom Wolfe's books, it's focused on puncturing all the stupid ideas people like to profess because it makes them look smarter - in this case, the idea that language is an evolutionary process - and in a way, the idea of evolution in general. He does this by focusing on two figures of science, one living and one dead: Noam Chomsky and Charles Darwin. Noam Chomsky - well, what can one say about him? Wolfe only points out the obvious, which is that 50 years after his promulgation on the theory of universal grammar, none of Chomsky's linguistic predictions have been borne out, even as imaging and scanning technology delves deeper into the brain. It's not heresy to point out Chomsky is glorified more for his political and philosophical opinions than on any objective review of his work.
As for Darwin, another historical figure who has been elevated to an unseemly height, Wolfe is also not in error in pointing out the whole incestuous, class-bound structure of the English scientific establishment of the 19th century, nor is he wrong in pointing out that Darwin was not really positing a scientific theory so much as a replacement creation myth - a just-so story, as Wolfe pithily notes. In truth, he's rather restrained in his criticism - the Wolfe of even 20 years ago could be significantly harsher to such figures, so limiting his mocking to Darwin's ideas, and also his hypochondria strikes me as restrained.
I suppose if this book has a weakness, I would say it was the sad lack of elaboration on Mendel as a response to Darwin, just as he chose Everett as a response/reaction to Chomsky. I think the book could have been significantly stronger if he had done that - currently the half devoted to Darwin feels a little light compared to the half of the book compared to Chomsky and Everett. But Mendell didn't really address language in his work on heredity, which is probably why it was left out.
As for the ending chapter where Wolfe talks about his own theory of language - well, I don't take it too seriously, but I doubt Wolfe does either. After all, he's just some guy - why would you listen to his ideas about linguistics? Which I think, in the end, is rather the point.