'14 Summer Reading -- Lamott discussion

3 views
Tickle-a little too neat for me

Comments Showing 1-4 of 4 (4 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Kimberly (new)

Kimberly | 6 comments Hi!
Is anyone else reading The Great Emergence?
While I like her conversational tone, the historian in me finds her oversimplifying quite a bit. I guess that's ok, but not when it makes the claim flat out wrong. For example, The notion (p 112) that the nuclear family was the basis of society for 500 years is just not true. Tickle is projecting BACKWARDS the "ideal" of the 19th century. She does this kind of thing repeatedly... and doesn't NEED to; the book IS interesting. It just seems that she is trying far too hard to make EVERY historical trend and transformation support her thesis.


message 2: by Rev. (new)

Rev. Brittany | 5 comments Mod
I wonder if this tendency come from being in her 80's -- I mean she is definitely sharp (though not an academic) and she is wanting to get this "stuff" out of her head while she can. So maybe a few "corners are cut."

I have had conversations like this. Especially with 90 year olds, they just get to the "good stuff" rather quickly because they don't have time for the pleasantries. I have wondering if it was always their personality or if it was something that developed with their age.

I have found it refreshing.


About this book, I will get to it next week....


message 3: by Rev. (new)

Rev. Brittany | 5 comments Mod
On a general note though, underlying assumptions often color our belief and writing. It is hard to make sure to stay in the moment and not project one's own cultural understanding on others.


message 4: by Kimberly (new)

Kimberly | 6 comments I don't disagree with most of what she's saying about TODAY--and that of course is her main interest. My own theory is that, when it comes to the historical bits, she's just reiterating assumptions of film and popular culture. That too is (in my mind) a central marker of 21st century American culture: that we--and I include myself here--get most of our "facts" from media that were never intended to be used as historical/literal fact.


back to top