Rating: 
Summary: Boomers in Paradise
Review: This is a decent work with a few rough spots. Brooks details the lifestyle of what is essentially what some sociologists call the "New Class"-that is, an educated elite which has grown to become the dominant social class in society, essentially supplanting the old monied aristocracy. The book is reasonably well-organized, and at times quite entertaining. In some of the middle portions of the book, particularly the section on Bobo intellectual life, Brooks does tend to needlessly stereotype, and his analysis tends to become more muddled, as his examples tend to become more exaggerated and less true to life. Probably the biggest flaw in the book is the failure of Brooks to realize that the Bobos are essentially Baby Boomers. The Bobo phenomenon is not quite the melding of the age-old bourgeois and bohemian cultures that Brooks makes it out to be. Rather, Bobo culture is more the manifestation of a type of outlook on life that we have seen before in American history, albeit without quite so much wealth involved. The Bobos are merely our most recent generation (namely, the Boom) to reflect idealism as its dominant mental outlook, unlike, say, Generation X, which tends toward a pragmatic, almost survivalist, view. Here, Brooks could have benefited by looking more closely at William Strauss' and Neil Howe's Generations, where a case is made that American history has cyclical aspects, with essentially four generational types moving across the historical stage, each with its own distinct tenor and view of life. What Brooks has essentially done is to provide us with multiple cameos of one of those generations, the Baby Boom, and show how it has come to terms with its early idealism (primarily expressed in the 1960s)as well as its younger-middle life stage (the 1980s) to produce a different type of American culture in the 1990s and beyond.
Rating:
Summary: No Bohemians Here
Review: I must say that I really enjoyed this book. The author is a very insightful observer of cultural trends, and very funny too. However, as is often the case with humorists, he does tend to make a number of gross generalizations about groups of people--in this case, usually to fit his notions into his thesis that there is a new upper class combining bourgeoisie and bohemians. I am not convinced that these people are bohemians, or that this is anything new; it's a change on the 1980s materialistic ethos, perhaps, which had less of the bohemian in its aesthetic sensibilities. But there is a long tradition of the middle/upper classes appropriating or popularizing bohemian fashions, without actually becoming bohemians. This was even true of the 1950s; just take a look at Revolutionary Road by Richard Yates. The idea that Wayne, PA is not entirely bourg. just because they have cafes is as silly as the notion that George W Bush is a BoBo. However, one of the nice things about the book is that it makes all sorts of bold assertions like that, making you think or react; and most of his insights do have a ring of clever truth to them. It's incredibly entertaining for anyone who might vaguely fall into the BoBo category, or who has contact with them. For anyone living in Berkeley or Seattle, anyone who attended a liberal arts school, or anyone who works in high tech, I would recommend the book highly.
Rating:
Summary: Well-written and Provocative!
Review: David Brooks is a TV pundit/panelist as well as an experienced newspaper editor. His coinage of "bobo" reminds me of Tom Wolfe's "boho". There is much to disagree with in this book (as many reviewers on this page attest) -- but there is much incisive observation in it, as most blurbs from professional blurbers maintain. My reading of it was well worth my time and effort, confirming in my mind that the "new upper class of intellectuals" are rootless gypsies, ever seeking fresh opportunities to squander our collective resources (their "green" facade notwithstanding) with the conviction that their college educations and gross incomes entitle them to do so.Brooks declares himself to be a proud member of the bobo (bohemian bourgeoisie) upper class, maintaining that the bobo life is great, and the bobo-ization of the U.S. is a good thing. But he sounds a note of regret, too. Small wonder. He nails a burgeoning "booboisie" (pace H. L. Mencken) as devoid of community and inner peace. He's a good writer (with some Russell-Baker-style laughs) for the nonce, anyway -- David Brooks -- give this inexpensive book a try.
Rating: 
Summary: I hated it.
Review: Parts of this book made me so mad that I shamelessly flung it at my walls. It seems to me that the author thinks that Bobos are adorable with their ability to spend small fortunes on absolutely nothing while pretending they have an ethos because they aren't like the marriage page of the NY Times in the 50s. If you are a baby boomer, please don't read this book, realize that you are in tune with the world, and then quietly lull yourself with an organic parka or whatever nonsense it is ok to spend thousands of dollars on in the Bobo world. Read Daniel Quinn. Read Paul Hawken.
Rating: 
Summary: A Yuppie By Any Other Name ...
Review: The world of the "Bourgeois Bohemian" (or "bobo"-a term the author has presumably coined in order to sell books) is one of obsessive over-achievement colored by a desire to be spiritually above and beyond the hoi polloi of the more typical American vulgar population. From the outset, author David Brooks makes it very clear that he considers himself to be part of this insidious clique. And true to his admission that this group is a self-depracating one, he pokes some good fun at them as well. That being said, perhaps readers can find it in their stomachs to complete the book. There's a brief historical explanation for the evolution of these people, which is actually quite good. It may not be the most sociologically correct presentation of facts, but it's certainly hard to argue against the presence and influence they have among us today. Don't expect much empirical or even PhD-type sociological diatribe here. It's a very lite read and not all too meaty or intellectual. But the author's observations are fairly convincing, if not altogether obvious. Most of the book is spent detailing examples of the materialistic behavior and spending habits of bobos. What Brooks totally fails to convince me of is the notion that this clique is in any way, shape or form "Bohemian." They only wish! The bobo group he aptly describes is a consumer group who may spend $1,000 on mountain climbing gear to wear to work without ever actually climbing a mountain. Or maybe that they travel off the beaten path in their $50,000 SUV. Or that they tend to disdain pleasures of the flesh which don't further their status as a Renaissance person. At one point, he notes how bobos increasingly shun the moralistic views of a religious figures, but are quick to shame anyone who violates the sacred health codes of our day (e.g. a pregnant woman who smokes). More hilariously, he notes how bobos don't "have" orgasms, they "achieve" them. All fun things must be done seriously-from sex to traveling to mountain climbing to skateboarding-and anyone who doesn't take them seriously taints their sacred cows. What in the world is "Bohemian" about that? I always thought Bohemians were poor, struggling, immoral and creative. By the time you're finished reading this silly book, you will probably be convinced -- as I was -- that bobos are simply the latest version of the yuppie. They are over-achieving, free-spending, self-righteous and imposing. Sure, they love to spend tons of money on a very contrived Bohemian "style" and attempt to achieve some sort of insight that is part of the rebellious culture, but they are about as "Bohemian" as a $4 latte served at a new age coffee shop with furniture that has been factory antiqued just two months prior. "Yuppies in Paradise" wouldn't have sold as many books though.
Rating: 
Summary: It's the old bait and switch, this time in book form
Review: Despite the cutesy title and satiric cover art, this is a book that truly can't find its voice. Brooks bills Bobos In Pardise as "comic sociology" but his treatment of his subject matter is so uneven it left me wondering what he really intended. Trying to be both funny and serious, Brooks falls flat on his face and succeeds at neither. The title and the description from the back cover led me to believe this book would be a satirical stab at the Bobo agenda: material excess and conspicuous consumption thinly veiled by hypocritical political correctness and environmentalism. (All those SUVs are sooo good for the environment!) What I got instead was a slobberingly reverential tribute to the very thing I expected to be satirized! What's worse, Brooks comes across as some sort of sociological, Bobo groupie, as if rubbing elbows with the new elite somehow makes him one of them. What really bothered me is that for a work of alleged sociology, Brooks completely ignores the cultural and environmental impact Bobos are having: gentrification, suburban sprawl, endless strip malls peppered with pretentious coffee shops and overpriced kitchen gadget stores, just to name a few. He also conveniently overlooks the fact that Bobo culture is, essentially, the culture of beige, and that as Bobos continue to set the agenga, those of us who remain uncharmed by their bland tastes and entertainments have fewer and fewer options.
Rating:
Summary: A good book in its own right, but won't save the world.
Review: I first read David Brooks' Bobos in Paradise in my junior year of high school. I was different then-- a lot more smug, certainly not as far left (politically) as I've become in my current form. When I then read it, it was more out of interest for the culture that I, as a middle- (perhaps upper-middle) class kid who did well in academics, was poised to inherit. Needless to say, I read it then out of self-interest, and attempt to critique it today from a larger perspective. Brooks makes some mistakes in his book. He declares the Bobos to be an "upper class." This is true in that, by Bobo (Brooks') standards, they lead the fullest and most enviable lifestyles. But that doesn't make them an upper class, because unfortunately the George W. Bush elite still holds far more power than the Bobo one. Bobos don't own the media, they don't control the big corporations, and they can't afford the huge campaign donations that corrupt the elections. Brooks also makes the mistake inherent in grouping people; "Bobos" include too wide a range to be classified in any one way. What defines a Bobo, one should first ask. I'm probably a member of the intellectual top 10% (not to brag or anything... :) ) but, as an 18-year-old, I make $6.50/hr in the summer at a grocery store. Additionally, I'm decidedly liberal, I deplore elitism (hypocritically, of course) and proudly drink tapwater (bottled water's only upscale for one reason: It was originally a symbol of upper-class life as an extended vacation; in other countries, where, unlike as is the case in America, the tapwater is of low quality, it is a necessity... thus it becomes an emblem of travel... but that's another topic). So, am I a Bobo? Should I be? I'm not sure he answers those questions... My greatest problem, though, with Brooks' book is not the material, which is fairly accurate and respectable coverage. However, he calls the Bobos "bourgeois bohemians," but they are bohemians of no sort. Bohemianism is about renunciation of material life for the artistic/spiritual life, and no one who works at Microsoft, for ex., or who even owns a cell-phone, while they may be respectable individuals (I'm not deriding them; I'm no bohemian), can self-apply this label. Bobos might intersect, juggle, or separate without compromising their corporate and their spiritual lives, but they do not renounce one for the other. They are fully bourgeois, merely a somewhat admirable bourgeois that admits its S&M (APEX...) proclivities or is more willing to consider alternative religions and liberal politics. Bobos in paradise is not a bad book, in fact it is a good one, but it must be read critically. The Bobo lifestyle is elitist and Brooks' "Bobo" class describes a wide range of not always related behavior, some of which is admirable, some of which is utterly self-indulgent and despicable. As well, his book seems to perpetuate the myth that we live in a Society of the Mind, that we've finally reached the point where the upper classes are filled by the smart and the working classes by the dumb. We haven't. 1.) There are many idiots/inepts/lazy people in the professional and managerial classes. 2.) There are many very intelligent, creative, hard-working (many working 2 full-time jobs), and interesting people in the so-called "working classes," probably at a fraction of (from my grocery store experience) 40 to 80 percent, the 80 applying to "working class" occupations requiring harder work. 3.) There's no convincing moral reason why a high-intelligence person ought to live a better life than a supposed "low-intelligence" person, anyway. Everyone, regardless of whether or not his/her IQ is 75 or 150, ought to have decent living conditions and be treated fairly by society... The scope of Brooks' thesis allows him to sidestep those three concerns. But you shouldn't (sorry for didactism). Other than that, it's a good book, and I recommend it. ~Mike
Rating:
Summary: Frankenstein monster of a book
Review: Brooks is a somewhat funny writer, but his idea of accurate social analysis is to report on the NY Times wedding section. Nearly everything else in this book is anecdotal with only a few suspicious and contrived statistics thrown in gratuitously. He portrays an emerging social type called a "Bobo." The Bobo is characterized in numberous ways in too many chapters. Bobos are like this and Bobos are like that, etc.,etc..In my opinion, he fails to establish that anyone is an actual Bobo according to his definition. His mythical Bobo is a lot like the Frankenstein monster--parts of a lot of people, but nobody in particular.
Rating:
Summary: Barf Alert
Review: To begin with, David Brooks is not the first author to provide a comic take on affluent people striking bohemian rebellious poses. Thirty years ago, after all, Tom Wolfe gave us the marvelous essay and book, Radical Chic. Brooks offers many keen observations about the Bobo outlook on work, consumption, politics, and so forth. Bobos in Paradise is interesting, thought-provoking, and worth the time spent reading it. I probably should give it five stars. But. . .the tone of gentle irony was ultimately infuriating to me. It's like he is almost apologizing to Bobos for hinting at some hypocrisies and moral inconsistencies in their behavior. His final peroration reads, "They can be silly a lot of the time. But if they raise their sights and ask the biggest questions, they have the ability to go down in history as the class that led America into another golden age."..... Rather than send the Bobos off on some great redemptive public crusade, I would prefer to see them first try to recover their moral compass. My views on the Bobo mentality are less sanguine than Brooks'. My site will have an essay on "Troubles in Bobos' Paradise."
Rating:
Summary: Funny insightful skewering of new corner-office pretensions
Review: The subtitle of "Bobos In Paradise" perfectly captures the subject of this book. Author David Brooks explains their game this way: "To calculate a Bobo's status, take his net worth and multiply it by his anti-materialistic attitudes." Brooks fills this book with hilarious insights about bourgeoise bohmemians. Among my favorites are such rules for bobos as: (1) Only vulgarians spend lavish amounts of money on luxuries. Cultivated people restrict lavish spending to necessities. (2) You can never have too much texture. (3) Educated elites are expected to spend huge amounts of money on things that used to be cheap. "Bobos prefer the same items as the proletariat," says Brooks. "It's just that they buy rarefied versions--the $3.75 cup of coffee, the $12 bar of soap, a white T-shirt for $50 or more." This book certainly captured the values of people that I know. But I rate "Bobos" ony four stars because it does read in parts like a pumped up magazine article, with Brooks seeming to develop his ideas to fill pages, not just to make a point. Regardless, READ THIS BOOOK!
|
