Rating: 
Summary: warmed over Hegelism
Review: The social class in power- establishment ivy league businessmen- merges with the reaction- sixties counterculture- creating the bourgeois bohemians- with the terribly silly abbreviation "bobos". This new power class mostly merges the defects of its antecedents- greed and pretentiousness- with possibly miniscule progress- social consciousness and education. So what is the new reaction? The "Jaywalking" hip-hop urban culture of Color?
Rating:
Summary: Yuppies Deconstructed
Review: this would be a much better book if it were not for the fact that a bobo is writing it. you should expect a marvelous thesis which is certainly coherent and compelling, but if you expect a serious tone throughout, you are headed for disappointment. i didn't expect to be laughing page after page as brooks discovers a new set of slams against yuppies. in fact, if you replace 'bobos' with 'yuppies', you'd get the kind of 'so what' feeling ahead of time that this book often merits. there were certain passages, especially in the description of the career path of a fictitious intellectual, that i thought that i was reading a less acerbic p.j. o'rourke. that is certainly entertaining enough, but what is never really addressed in this work are the consequences for an america whose elites are all great compromisers. as a description of this group, the book excels, but the context in world-historical form is what i was looking for. instead of providing insight to what counterbalances the excess of bobo equivocation 'bobos in paradise' becomes something of a high falutin' mockumentary, complete with references to bagehot, toqueville et al. very much like bobo ethics, this book impresses you with its self-importance and gently nudges you around by being intellectually convincing. yet for all its perception, it lacks even the spirit of a dennis miller rant. i am in agreement with the theory that the 60s and 80s have been moderated into that clintonesque goo of the bobocracy. and i agree that now is the right time for that moderation to prevail, but i have no way to be certain that such values will matter to gen-x as they eventually replace the suv crowd. and so 'bobos in paradise' remains but a clever snapshot in time. i was hoping for a bit more.
Rating: 
Summary: New Nomenclature, not New Information
Review: Okay, so the only thing you need to know is that the Baby Boomers got tired of being referred to as Yuppies (after all, they are no longer Young, are they?), with all the bad press related to this classification. So, instead of spending their money on BMWs, Guccis and glorifying the wonders of urban living, they became "BoBos" instead...Yukons and Land Rovers, Timberlines and Blunnies, and reinventing suburbia to become just like Bethesda, Maryland or Edina, Minnesota. And they attempt to justify it not by saying "greed is good" but by saying to themselves, hey, I shop for organic food to put into my Sub Zero in my subdivision McMansion or rehabbed city townhouse, so my ridiculous spending habits are okay. This author hasn't said anything really new about those over the age of 35; instead, he's just given selfish, overpriced behavior a new, catchy name that has nothing to do with real life or real environmentalism or real anthing outside of a real hefty money market account. Bourgeois, oui. Bohemian? Never.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't be fooled...
Review: At the risk of repeating the valid criticisms I have skimmed here, I will attempt to summarize the major flaws of this very flawed book. Brooks assumes that the Bobos at some point in their lives have shared counter cultural, radical, and creative ideas associated with bohemians. Is this the case, or are they merely tourists of the lifestyle? I am reminded of John Lennon's observation about "Day Trippers", the weekend bohemians of the 60s. B. would have us think that the bourgeois synthesized Bohemia into the Bobo, but the book does not provide the evidence for some such Hegelian process. Instead, he runs down a seemingly inexhaustible (and exhausting) list of their lifestyle choices, concentrating especially on their consumer habits, sometimes to humorous effect. Eventually, though, the act becomes tiresome, and he rather lamely attempts some serious analysis. This is where the book falls flat, and the thud is deafening. If the Bobo had truly incorporated bohemian values into the upper class sensibility, we would not see them purchasing SUVs, for instance. These vehicles get terrible gas mileage, which is incompatible with the Bobos' supposed deep caring for the environment. Also, these expensive vehicles pose a danger to those less fortunate motorists who can only afford a small car. Such contradictions can be found elsewhere in the opening chapters (electricity-gobbling appliances, for instance); they should be kept in mind when the reader gets to the weak arguments of Bobo morality and spirituality in the later chapters. B. claims that the Bobos are concerned with preservation of America's older neighborhoods, to save older structures and our heritage, yet the facts speak to an utter lack of concern of the Bobos when it comes to their own "needs." Witness the gentrification of the Mission District in San Francisco, which has forced the traditional Hispanic population out because of sky-high rents. There is a noticeable lack of mention of the lower classes in the book, in fact. The Bobo is depicted unintentionally as a classic elitist, with a narcissistic streak that would make the 70s "Me Decade" seem tame by comparison. Thus, the horrific reaction some readers might have when they discover that B. not only thinks the Bobos are a positive force of nature, but that he counts himself as one. If B. were approaching the subject critically, he would undoubtedly have tackled the psychology of the Bobo, and why the fascination with bohemian culture. He never tackles this very key point; the possible issues of guilt and self-esteem, for instance. Or how about the Info Age obsession with research? Is this lifestyle optimized based on careful study of all the facts? Is the incorporation of the bohemian a sign of neurosis instead? Don't the descriptions of consumption sound like classic obsessive-compulsive disorder? How does the Bobo grapple with Bobo ethical questions, such as the dilemma posed by optimizing his lifestyle choice by buying the "best" coffee from a plantation that exploits its workers, against the "lesser" coffee that would be more politically correct? The more you ponder these contradictions, the more you are apt to recognize the absurdity of buying B.'s arguments. B. later talks of the Bobo spiritual life, wherein they pick and choose freely from an ever-changing menu of religious beliefs. Again, the consumer approach to salvation. Yet the earlier chapters allow one to reach a different conclusion: that the real spiritual instinct has been supplanted by entertainment itself, in the form of food, gadgets, and popular culture that are considered superior and "hip". It is this obsessive approach to lifestyle that fills the void left by the decline of true religious commitment. Religion then becomes yet another item for research and eventual consumption. As this is a conservative's project to convince us of the likability of the Bobo over previous elite classes, he distracts the reader from his true purpose: to celebrate the death of true bohemianism, by co-opting it and robbing it of its alternative world view, which stood in opposition to that of the global exploits of the bourgeois in the realms of commerce and politics. This is the core piece of bohemianism that the Bobo rejects, which makes the so-called synthesis impossible. A much, much better analysis of the Elites and their effect on the erosion of democracy worldwide is presented in Christopher Lasch's "The Revolt of the Elites," which is the work of a true intellectual, not the faux sort exemplified by David Brooks.
Rating:
Summary: Fluffy, with No Edge
Review: This is a fluffy look at the behavior of an influential segment of wealthy people today. Very funny in parts, tedious in others. But social comment is best done at a distance, and Brooks seems too worried about what his Bobo friends and neighbors might think to finish what he started. The book trails off, as he descends into explaining why the Bobos are different (and better) than the generations of wealthy people that have preceeded them. I'd take Paul Fussell's "Class" any day over this.
Rating:
Summary: Enjoyable but incomplete social commentary
Review: David Brooks has been one of my favorite magazine writers ever since early '96, when his essay, "Taking Buchanan Seriously," perfectly captured just what it was that I found interesting, and disturbing, about Pat Buchanan's worldview. Many subsequent articles have been humorous looks at the contradictory nature of upper-class life in the '90's, and now he's attempted to string them all together and infuse them with some profound philosophic or cultural significance- not to mention a snappy new name. Brooks clearly hopes that "bobo" will become part of the chattering-class's lexicon in the coming years, but his attempts to make everything about these people fit into the box that his new category puts them in leads to some tortured logic and incomplete ananlysis. Brooks is at his best when he is lampooning these people, ripping into them with all the ferocity their contradictory natures deserve. He flogs them for their conspicuous (and often inane) consumption, their flaccid spirituality, their content-free politics, their ability to turn their vacations into torture tests that would have made Torquemada cringe, and so on. But he repeatedly cushions his most effective blows by accepting at face value each of the two faces his subjects present to the world. And he occasionally just ignores alternative explanations for their behavior that would undermine his cutesy thesis title. For example, he insists that bobos live in the gym because thay need to turn every recreation into a contest. He neglects to point out here what he remembers to mention elsewhere, that traditional values such as the sanctity of marriage have eroded among this class , that careeers often push even the first marriage into years when the bloom of youth is already fading, and that all this newfound freedom has come with a poison pill of insecurity. People go to health clubs to look good, David. No need to get cute about it. His essay on intellectual life also rings false because he seems to broaden the definition of intellectual to include, for instance, himself. Newspaper columnists, TV pundits, book publishers, think tank interns, and ex-Secretaries of commerce all get invited into the tent, while college professors barely rate a mention even as he insists that their status in the larger society has never been greater. He glibly proclaims that the ideological divide between professors and the business community has disappeared. Oh, really? That may be true in the hard sciences and the technology fields, where many professors are starting their own software or biotech companies and reaping millions, but a humanities professor still qualifies as a conservative if he's voting for Al Gore over Ralph Nader. The fall of communism and the booming American economy have done nothing to dull the leftist sensibilities of most humanities and social science profs, whose job opportunities, after all, have not expanded like those of their similarly over-educated peers. For all his satirical ragging, Brooks ultimately likes the Bobos, counts himself among their ranks, and considers their rise beneficial to society. Fair enough. Certainly there is much to like about present-day America, espescially my investment portfolio. I'm delighted that business and businessmen have become respectable, and that the aggressive liberalism of the '60's and '70's, while still dominant on campus, has evaporated into the soft Third Way blabbergook of Clinton-Gore. But this notion that the bourgeois and bohemian cultures have merged with each other with their basic tenets intact is simply ludicrous. Basically, business swallowed bohemia whole, and all that's left are the organic vegetables, the censorious liberal do-goodism, and the $4 cup of joe. Real bohemians wouldn't work fifteen-hour days no matter how "stimulating" the "workplace environment" might be. Real bohemians wouldn't drive a vehicle that could house a family of six. Real bohemians didn't count fat grams. And real bohemians SMOKED, goddamnit! Do you remember? When people smoked, and drank, and did drugs, and didn't think a person a failure if he died before Al Roker got to wish him a happy 104th on the Today Show? There are no bohemians anymore, which is good for the NASDAQ, but bad for the soul. And Brooks won't admit this. He is trying to tell us that CEO's and mangement gurus are pushing a real bohemian philosophy, instead of the same bulls..t sloganeering that the advertising agencies are pumping into their TV commercials. He is trying to tell us that the conspicuous consumption of the '90's is somehow less problematic than the conspicuous consumption of the '80's, when the only real difference is that, with a Democrat in the White House, no one at the New Yorker has thought to do a cover stroy on the "decade of greed." He wants us to believe that a genuine and thoughtful reconciliation has taken place here, rather than a papering over of differences by people who, for all their fancy degrees, don't want to think very much about anything not directly related to their resumes. All we really have here is a bunch of liberal college students who grew up, got rich, and now tell themselves that, because they buy environmentally-friendly furniture and have the proper bumper-sticker on their Navigator, they're still thinking globally and acting locally. If "bobo" doesn't catch on in the popular parlance, I have an alternative that suits these people perfectly: Hypocrites!
Rating:
Summary: The X Way Out
Review: Paul Fussell seems to have predicted the rise of the Bobo in his book Class (see the final chapter, "The X Way Out"). Fussell's one chapter description of this type of creature is wittier and more on-target than Brooks' entire book.
Rating:
Summary: We Are So Much Better Than You Lower-Class People
Review: I was prepared to like this book, but what I found was not a satire of "Bobos" but a smug apology for them. Other ruling classes have depended on money or titles for their legitimacy, but Brooks really believes that the Bobos earned their place by being so much smarter than everyone else--as if accidents like chance, inherited wealth, or geography played no part. (The book is a paean to the east and Left coasts; the fly-over states are not important, except for a side-trip to gentrified Montana.) Brooks depicts the Bobos as sitting pretty for now: but we have not been able to repeal nature, or history. Events don't stand still, and eventually America will be faced with challenges to replace those of the Cold War. Come the next Great Depression or the next war this book will look pretty silly. And our grandchildren may look on us the way the post World War I generation looked on the complacent Victorians--as naive, unprepared, and oh so out of touch with the real world most people live in.
Rating:
Summary: Better than Ambien, and usually more interesting...
Review: After succumbing to the hype, I bought this book and found it amusing for the better part of a month. As a hypnotic agent, I'd rate it a 10/10. Although it was laced with excessive pedantic drivel and overripe metaphors, I found the book's razor sharp wit more entertaining than hypnagogic hallucinations. Mr. Brooks acts as a self-appointed sufi of the educated elite who takes it upon himself to trash my favorite vices starting with nubby bread and ending with utilitarian travel to exotic locales. The lingering question for me...What's so bad about having a new world order determined by academic prowess? Perhaps this book would be a better read for those from colder climes who still view DNA as a determinant of social entitlement. As for those of us living in the shadow of Hollywood, it just provides fodder for interesting cocktail party quotes.
Rating:
Summary: Better than Ambien, and usually more interesting...
Review: After succumbing to the hype and purchasing this book, it became a diversion that lasted the better part of a month. The book often served as a bedtime tranquilizer for me. I found Brooks' style of writing overly pedantic and at times downright dry, but always filled with razor sharp wit. As a self-annointed sufi for the educated elite, he takes it upon himself to bash all of my personal proclivities from nubby breads to utilitarian pleasure travel to exotic locales. My lingering question...What's so bad about using academic supremacy as currency in the new world order? A worthwhile read, but only if you have the patience to plow through overripe metaphors in search of clever gems of social commentary. Not unlike the Barney's warehouse sale.
|
