Rating: 
Summary: An insightful lesson on history and the future
Review: I picked up "The Fourth Turning" four years ago at a public garage sale and was captivated by its prediction. After reading chapter after chapter of amazing parallels in past generations across history I knew that the authors were on to something and it felt so evident that there really was a period of life-shattering crisis up for us in the near future; it was evident enough after reflecting on the thought that anything has to grow through cycles of change, decay and rebirth. When the planes hit the towers on September 11, 2001, I was convinced that this it indeed and enjoyed a special moment of silence reading back over my book as I was completely sure by now we were in for twenty years of a changed mood rather than just a single shocking event. Eventually the shock from September 11 disippated, the months went by, and I realized we were still in the Third Turning after all. But still I'll never forget the exciting prophecies of an era of crisis that "The Fourth Turning" has in offer. And that still have a chance, and a destiny, to come true in not too many years.
Rating: 
Summary: Think-tank work
Review: I wasn't looking for a bunch of rhetoric of the conservative, "bring back tradition!" ilk, but this is what I got. The Fourth Turning, purport to be about historical cycles though it might, is nonetheless filled with a prescriptive traditionalist/virtuecrat mixed with puritanism and a dash of Tipper Gore stance. Bring back values like honor and duty, observe "decency" in your personal conduct, more discipline for the kids, make sure society develops tighter standards, don't let go of the Traditional virtues, get violence and vulgarity out of our entertainment. The authors seem to be on a quest to eradicate four-letter words society has deemed "evil" and clean up our popular entertainment. When it's not talking about early historical eras, the book is bemoaning the ever-branching diversity of choices and lifestyles in modern life or criticizing the "edginess" of Generation X pop culture. All the theory about cycles and generations, the historical parallels, the warning that a new era of crisis is just to come, is just an excuse to tell readers to prepare for a crisis era that may or may not be coming by celebrating the importance of authority, ceasing unconventional behavior in an era that will demand conformity, and settling down to focus on family values. Institutions are actually advised by this book, for instance, to set up as strict a regime of rules, zero tolerance and demands on conduct and dress on our kids as possible to make sure that children can grow up to be a good "Hero" generation. The theory about generations and "turnings" itself didn't really convince me, and I get the feeling inside that the quotes and events for early historical generations were selected out of a sea of many, just to find a few examples that will make the generations seem to fit into the pattern. Even with the living generations, many of their assertions don't seem to ring quite true. For instance, I fail to see any evidence that our "Thirteenth Generation" (which they call their generation born between 1961 and 1981) has grown up with remarkable survival skills; and the authors describe their Silent Generation (1925-1942) as having been conformist and risk-averse young adults during their coming of age era to fit them into the pattern of the "Artist" generational type; they assert this lifecycle for all the Silent generation and for ALL Artist generations throughout, with the Silents holding their heads down compliantly as the most un-rebellious generation since the Progressive Generation (1843-1859) -- all this for the peers of James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, Natalie Wood, Bill Haley, Chuck Berry, Bob Dylan, Dick Clark, Don Martin and Hugh Hefner. Nor would I expect the Thirteenth Generation to grow up to be as survivalist as the Gilded Generation (1822-1842) because they're both in the "Nomad generation" position in this cycle, when the Gilded had to grow up in a still-mostly-rural America with an unsettled and wildlife-filled Gold Rush world. Worse yet, the portraits they paint of the four recurring generational archetypes in their theory sound like parodies: the authors characterize the Prophets as self-righteous, Final, colossally complacent Gods engaged in their apocalyptic duel of Doom, filled with sanctimonious rage; the Nomads as keen, sharp-toothed, survivalist, ratty cads off the street with all the hardness of a Dickens orphan walking by in ripped clothes and drooling at a chance to cheat someone out of a good deal; the Heroes as lockstep, march-to-duty, scoutlike knee-jerk order-followers just itching to die for their country in war; and the Artists as soft, washy, talk-about-our-feelings, emotional marshmallows with all the huggable indecisiveness and unproactiveness of a high school guidance counselor, willing to let people walk all over them. And the birthyears they assign to generations have nothing in common by the time you get from one year of the boundary to another. For instance, the authors set the boundaries for their "Thirteenth Generation" between 1961 and 1981 (but not 1960 or 1982). How does a person born in 1961 have ANYTHING in common with one born in 1981, either in personality or in location and role in history? Of course many theories will run into a FEW problems like this, but this one seems whipped up to sound just convincing enough to sell an authoritarian ideology.
Rating:
Summary: Incredible
Review: An extraordinary work of scholarship and historical analysis. An incredible work. BUY IT AND STUDY IT!!
Rating: 
Summary: Don't Buy It New!!
Review: Don't buy this book new. This book is built upon a very provactive and interresting thesis about the spiraling and repetitive nature of history(The thesis concludes history is driven by 4 generational archetypes that reoccur every 20-25 years.). The thesis is well worth exploring and pondering unfortunately the editor (if there was one) failed to guide the authors. If there had been a working editor this book would have been 150 pages (plus notes) versus the 330+ pages. It also tends to generalize to support the thesis. It is particullarly annoying that so much of the supporting evidence is based upon examples of "pop" urban culture with no consideration given to the "breadth" of the U.S. In fact it was not clear to me whether non-white Americans share the archetypal traits and in turn are influencing and participating in the American saeculum (read the book for the definition).
Rating:
Summary: A fountain of hope
Review: For years I was distraught at the descent of our society into chaos and the decades of perversion, destruction of social norms and respect for authority, government-is-bad beliefs, fragmenting families, and the quest for individual rights in finding oneself at the expense of society. With all the bad behavior and disappearance from traditional values from modern life I thought we were going to go on further and further down that line straight into an unbelievable apocalypse. From the beatnicks to the 60's to the 90's to who knows what... Now I realize that this anti-social trend is only temporary and in only a few years we will enter a new era with refreshment of values. Destruction of community that lasted for decades has in fact happened many times in modern Western history, and every time it has been replaced by a new resurgence of community and finding our traditional roots again. For anyone who has ever lamented the victimized, diverse, anti-authoritarian direction our society has been taking, The Fourth Turning provides a fountain of hope. Personally, I can't wait.
Rating: 
Summary: Not a worthy book -- move on
Review: The Fourth Turning, by William Strauss and Neil Howe, is a theoretical if somewhat dubious explanation of era changes based on generations. It predicts that America is set to enter the next "turning" in 2005, which will be one of disaster. If you're looking for info about Sept. 11, 2001, this is not what it's about. May be some good reading, may interest some, but those who were expecting a non-generational event like 911 will be disappointed.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting, but flawed
Review: Though there is an element of probable truth in what Strauss & Howe have written here, and certainly mankind's recorded experiences have been one of cyclical ebb and flow with a thankfully upward bias, I don't believe one can make anywhere near the pat characterizations and conclusive leaps found here. On the other hand, if intended as a work of propaganda, the vehicle is perfect, for all good propaganda contains enough of an element of probable truth to be plausible.
My biggest gripe is that most everything in this book is arranged and written with the assumption that their thesis is essentially correct, a mode I find overreaching, suspect, and at best sloppy. In other words, past and present are bent, filtered, crammed, and cajoled to fit a simplistic, "four generational archetypes" thesis, whether this has been supported by the breadth and depth of reality or not. Strauss & Howe have a much easier time with the future, as it is (obviously) much more malleable. One glaring gloss-over is the assertion that this "unraveling" period is the "age of the individual", which I find totally laughable. And now, using their pat model, they conveniently "predict" that we will all become much more collective, as is both our "duty" & "destiny". I find the wholesale grading & categorization of people facile, diminishing, and overly fatalistic. On the other hand, this book is an oligarchic collectivist's wet dream. The authors' warning to the future is not that we are but mindless automatons, locked in an endless and stupid cycle of mass destruction by following our collectivist predestination at this juncture, but that we might "fail" in this respect, and then woe is to us. Right. Your stock false choice if there ever was one. Either these guys are commissioned to write this stuff, or they have a more than adequate knack for figuring out which way the wind is blowing and sucking up to it for fun and profit. In any event, with the way events now appear to be evolving, they'll likely turn out being "right". Definitely worth a read, but one best take the ring out of one's nose before starting in. As you read this book, here's something to consider, a quote from Hilter's Reichsmarshall, Hermann Goering: "Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
Rating:
Summary: This book changed my life and it will change yours
Review: One of the books that changed my life, this book gave me hope that the destructive social trends of the last 20 years are not permanment and the world is about or already has entered an transformative era to transform it into a higher plane of civilisation. This book shows you a new view on how history works and functions. After this book, you will see the world in a new plane of thought like I have.
Rating: 
Summary: They're onto something, but don't take everything as gospel
Review: I wrote an earlier review of this book in which I accused William Strauss and Neil Howe of having an agenda they are trying to promote with their books; in their case, a peculiar mix of pro-war and traditional values neoconservatism, and FDR New Deal liberalism. After looking a little deeper into their books and other activities (including the bipartisan Concord Coalition which is trying to reduce the federal debt, and the hilarious Washington D.C. comedy group "The Capitol Steps"), and hearing interviews of one of the authors on the radio, I now believe my initial impression was unfair. I am rewriting my review because I no longer think Strauss and Howe were out to promote an agenda by writing this and their other books, but that they are merely casual observers who have hit upon something big. They are describing what they believe the implications are for society, and nothing more. In other words, the "don't shoot the messenger" rule applies here. The Strauss/Howe thesis is that American generations follow a repeating cycle of four generational "types", which in turn drive a repeating cycle of four "turnings" in American culture, known as a Crisis, a High, an Awakening, and an Unraveling. The last Crisis was the Great Depression and World War II, and as of the time this book was published we were in the last years of an Unraveling (typified by everything from grunge rockers to the Michigan Militia to AIDS, crack, and Generation X slackers). As with their previous book Generations, The Fourth Turning is a fascinating read as a cultural history of past generations and turnings, but I believe becomes a little too specific in its predictions when Strauss and Howe try to tell us exactly how the next Crisis, and the rising Millennial Generation, are going to turn out. In this regard, it is easy to see why somebody would read this book and get the impression that Strauss and Howe are trying to push a particular agenda. I did at first, and reading the other reviews here makes it apparent that a lot of people got this impression. But I believe their turnings theory is essentially correct, and it does have major implications for the directions society will take in the near future. This does not necessarily mean a turn toward conservatism or toward liberalism, but that what both conservatism and liberalism mean will undergo some major adjustments in the coming years, just as they did during the 1960s and the 1930s. They have hit on something big with this theory, and this book (or their previous book, "Generations"), will change the way you look at historical events and people. When reading about events and people, I now make a point of looking up what "turning" that event took place in and what generations the people in question were part of. This helps with a broader understanding of historical events and their place in history. History may not exactly repeat, but it does echo. This book has also sparked an intense interest in the Great Depression and the Civil War (the last two "Fourth Turnings"), and in the 1960s (the last "Second Turning"). One thing I would still warn about, though, is taking everything the authors say, especially when they make specific predictions about the future, as gospel. For example, they predict that some kind of mandatory national service is coming, either a return to the military draft or a non-military service like AmeriCorps. In another place, they predict that Generation Xers will lead a campaign to end no-fault divorce. I believe that the inclusion of predictions like these are the book's biggest fault, and illustrates why so many people read a big-government political agenda into this book. Again, I no longer think the authors necessarily want these things to occur, but are merely sounding a warning that they could.
Rating:
Summary: It's sad that this book sells
Review: In plush, overflown language, THE FOURTH TURNING introduces youngsters as the Millennial Generation, who are prepared to meet the world's challenges by all marching in scoutlike formation. It says they will listen dutifully to their elders. It says that school uniforms way back when in a few schools have made the whole generation disciplined and refusing to question authority. It claims teen culture should be proudly rejecting everything X-ish by now. From this book, we learn, today's teens will now be following big brands. Oh, and did I mention it said these teens will all be cheerful when restrictions are based on their conduct? Now, do you see any of this happening? Then why should you believe any if the other (badly-written) junk in here?
|
