Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: stories: A&E: Book Review

Re: “Malcolm Gladwell's critics need the faith of David

A quick search on wikipedia reveals that Malcolm Gladwell's youth was far more nuanced than indicated in the review. A return to religion sounds affected.

Posted by Mt Lacey on 02/20/2014 at 9:54 PM

Re: “Malcolm Gladwell's critics need the faith of David

Somehow I get the feeling that Gladwell exempts himself from a lot of criticisms...

For example: does Gladwell write about plastic surgery in any of his books? And if so, does he acknowledge and discuss the economics and meaning of his extremely obvious nose job?

0 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Cassie on 01/26/2014 at 2:04 PM

Re: “Malcolm Gladwell's critics need the faith of David

I didn't read this as a critique of Gladwell and his works, but as a report on the criticisms and an attempt to understand their points. Way too brief for that. I have read all his books and like his style and content. Do I believe everything he writes is without fault? Well no, that would be silly. But he has an interesting spin on things and that is always valuable.

10 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by kirbang on 01/23/2014 at 9:41 AM

Re: “Malcolm Gladwell's critics need the faith of David

What do Gladwell and the author of this article have in common?

Exhibit A: Critics gonna critique, as the saying goes.

SMH. This critique needs to look in the mirror.

4 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by The Gorgeous JR on 01/22/2014 at 2:34 PM

Re: “Malcolm Gladwell's critics need the faith of David

The reason people don't like Gladwell is because he symbolizes pseudo-intellectualism in society that has deep and lasting strains of anti-intellectualism. When you're faced with a large number of people that reject evolution and vaccinations as part of their drive to get rid of 'secularizing' forces and the rest of them believe in a reductive and anecdotal pseudoscience then those who are conducting real research and are taking the time to produce scientifically rigorous writing aren't left much of an audience. That's a problem, especially since the scientific method is probably the best way we have now of understanding the universe and making the human condition better and to have all that be ignored because it's 'not exciting enough' or 'too secular' is a fucking tragedy.

9 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by goosedown on 01/22/2014 at 9:36 AM

Re: “Malcolm Gladwell's critics need the faith of David

Why? Why a rant to tear down Gladwell? Anyone who puts anything "out there" will have critics. However, I can tell you I have many times applied the lessons provided in Gladwell's writings to everyday life and business. Gladwell provides insights and the reader is given the opportunity to make application--which I have. I continually refer back to lessons learned from concepts in his books including Connectors, Broken Window Syndrome, Speaking-up/Communication and more. David & Goliath provides insight into how disadvantages can be an impetus to some greater good. Not only does he illustrate it with powerful examples, but I have seen it played out in various other contexts.

Anxiously waiting for the next Gladwell book,

Jack W Bruce @JackWBruce

6 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Jack W Bruce on 01/22/2014 at 6:39 AM

Re: “Scott McClanahan writes with ecstatic energy in Hill William

You might be interested in taking a look at McClanahan's previous book, Crapalachia: A Biography of Place.

Posted by Wyatt Williams on 11/30/2013 at 7:50 PM

Re: “Scott McClanahan writes with ecstatic energy in Hill William

Thanks for the clarification.

Truckers didn't go to those extremes when I was your age. I guess the pressures today are different.

Anyway, excellent article, but one question:

We say that Appalachia is in the South, but isn't it distinctly different from the rest of the South. Look at Kentucky and West Virginia the core of Appalachia; even though they have a racist history, they still refused to join the Confederacy. They're not the same Southerners.

Did the author address that ?

Posted by lwc30326 on 11/30/2013 at 7:10 PM

Re: “Scott McClanahan writes with ecstatic energy in Hill William

Sorry, didn't mean to go over your head with that one, LWC.

Truck stops used to sell these powerful little ephedrine pills at the register that would help long haul drivers stay awake during overnight drives, so they became known as "trucker speed" or "cross tops" (for the cross that would be embossed on the top of the pill). Back when I worked in restaurants, guys who worked the line would pop a couple to make it through a double. A few years ago, the crackdown on ephedrine forced those manufacturers to change their formulas for the stuff known as "trucker speed." Now, the pills that you'll find at the counter of truck stops are basically just caffeine.

As for your other question, most of my off time is spent drinking coffee and reading books. I'm pretty sure that my bosses are aware of what a nerd I am.

Posted by Wyatt Williams on 11/30/2013 at 5:09 PM

Re: “Scott McClanahan writes with ecstatic energy in Hill William

Dear Wyatt,


Your drug-of-choice references are a little too hip for the room. We don't know what "trucker speed" is, nor "cross-topped ephedrine".


Do Debbie and/or Sharry know what you're doing in your off time ?

Posted by lwc30326 on 11/30/2013 at 3:35 PM

Re: “Beatles vs. Stones

Hendrix.

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by T From ATL (362090) on 11/10/2013 at 4:04 PM

Re: “Beatles vs. Stones

"The Beatles had the same percentage of filller"

Not even close, dude. Do not make me break this down for you in an Excel spreadsheet complete with line graphs and pivot tables.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by NadVertising on 11/07/2013 at 9:17 AM

Re: “Beatles vs. Stones

Haha - should have just let the benign observation sit there...I had to provoke him.

Ringo hit the drums. Charlie Watts plays the drums. The Beatles had the same percentage of filller, just less time, and they couldn't keep it up. The worst singer in the Stones is definitely Keef. Just dig my third favorite Stones tune "Happy." It's horrible! I love it!

0 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by oydave on 11/06/2013 at 10:30 AM

Re: “Beatles vs. Stones

Ringo hit the drums twice as hard as Charlie Watt. The Beatles also didn't have entire decades worth of filler, and knew when to hang it up. Lastly, the worst singer in the Beatles played drums. The worst singer in the Stones was the frontman.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by NadVertising on 11/06/2013 at 7:22 AM

Re: “Beatles vs. Stones

the Rolling Stones has Balls

Posted by Jonathan Lewis on 11/05/2013 at 11:36 PM

Re: “Beatles vs. Stones

Ain't never heard a no Johnny ORANGE-seed have ya?

Daan-dah daduhdaaa...dadadanana...Daan-daah daduhdaaa...dadadanana....

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by oydave on 11/04/2013 at 7:59 PM

Re: “Beatles vs. Stones

Apples and oranges. Still, this seems like a good read.

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by NadVertising on 11/04/2013 at 1:31 PM

Re: “Beatles vs. Stones

both were great bands but when it comes time to choose a pandora station, i'll take Creedence or Zeppelin.

2 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by wesleywhatwhat on 11/01/2013 at 8:53 AM

Re: “Beatles vs. Stones

I haven't read the book yet but I will. Here's my definitive take on the debate: http://jakepollard3.wordpress.com/2010/12/13/beatles-vs-stones/

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by Jake Pollard on 10/31/2013 at 8:14 AM

Re: “Beatles vs. Stones

That thugs-gentlemen commentary says more about Sean O'Mahony's class prejudices than anything else. The Beatles were working class blokes, the Stones from middle class families.

6 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by elsavio438fe6 on 10/30/2013 at 4:21 PM

© 2014 Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation