Something for Nothing: Luck in America

Rating:
Summary: Pretty neat book...
Review: I'm not sure I'm convinced by the attempt at thumbnail psychological profiling of gamblers from times past, especially in a book as breezy and entertaining as this one. But my only real complaint was the author's tendency to try to make himself sound like he possesses special sympathy for those who dare to buck tradition (and perhaps sound reasoning) in order to get a little closer to the reality of chance and dollar-bought pleasure. Academics are always claiming to side with the impoverished little guy, as if anyone really belives that the sedentary class of academic bourgeois even understands the choices made by all those who avoid institutional permanence and comfort and upper middle class gloss; are these scholars really on the side of those who take risks and think of money as the route to ephermal but appreciated material pleasure? After reading this book I found myself thinking: If only academics were capable of the same daring as the people profiled in this charming book!

Rating:
Summary: Truly fascinating but a bit of a slog
Review: If it is the case that nothing much has changed regarding survival of individual humans and their families and it remains a jungle out there, then this book should be part of the survival kit, or first aid kit alongside the bandages, stingose, and burn cream. An unlikely event as digesting this somewhat academic book is not quite as satisfying as pulling the handle on a slot machine or throwing the dice or putting another 200 each way on that horse race. It is more likely to be read by those of the Protestant persuasion who see sacrifice and hardwork as the road to grace than those of the Catholic persuasion who see chance and miracles as signficant. It is also an historical analysis of American culture(sport, art, etc) in relation to the pursuit of happiness, the American dream. And lets face it, governments depend on gambling for a significant part of their revenue - whether its Wall Street, lotteries, Casinos or racing, it's big bucks. A fascinating book but a bit of a slog.

Rating:
Summary: Something Special
Review: In "Something For Nothing" Jackson Lears has come up with nothing less than a fresh way to look at the American idea. He tells the story of two cultures: -- "the culture of control," and the "culture of chance" -- that have bubbled beneath the surface American life from the beginning (and he traces their roots deeper into history as well). He returns to gambling often, but this is much more than a social history of gambling. It's easy to think of America as place where the culture of control dominates and always has, in the form of the "work ethic" that says that the way to get ahead is to work hard, merit will be rewarded, etc. This notion is so basic to the way many contemporary debates are framed that we hardly even think about it anymore. But there are now and always have been competing ideas out there -- in the most unexpected places -- about the role of chance, or luck, in life. At times the culture of control has simply denied chance, and aother times it has tried to subdue it (through everything from insurance to statistics-based social science to management theory). At times the lines have been blurry -- business risk-taking has been culturally rewarded even when it is as much a matter of chance as a (demonized) spin of the roulette wheel. Obviously I'm oversimplifying, but the book is incredibly thought-provoking. It's also thick with references drawn from history, culture, art, literature, philosophy -- at times this is dazzling and at times it's overwhelming; one almost feels the need to pause, get a Ph.D. in American Studies, and then return to the book. But on the whole Lears is in command of the material, and makes his book a fascinating and important read.

Rating:
Summary: Something Special
Review: In "Something For Nothing" Jackson Lears has come up with nothing less than a fresh way to look at the American idea. He tells the story of two cultures: -- "the culture of control," and the "culture of chance" -- that have bubbled beneath the surface American life from the beginning (and he traces their roots deeper into history as well). He returns to gambling often, but this is much more than a social history of gambling. It's easy to think of America as place where the culture of control dominates and always has, in the form of the "work ethic" that says that the way to get ahead is to work hard, merit will be rewarded, etc. This notion is so basic to the way many contemporary debates are framed that we hardly even think about it anymore. But there are now and always have been competing ideas out there -- in the most unexpected places -- about the role of chance, or luck, in life. At times the culture of control has simply denied chance, and aother times it has tried to subdue it (through everything from insurance to statistics-based social science to management theory). At times the lines have been blurry -- business risk-taking has been culturally rewarded even when it is as much a matter of chance as a (demonized) spin of the roulette wheel. Obviously I'm oversimplifying, but the book is incredibly thought-provoking. It's also thick with references drawn from history, culture, art, literature, philosophy -- at times this is dazzling and at times it's overwhelming; one almost feels the need to pause, get a Ph.D. in American Studies, and then return to the book. But on the whole Lears is in command of the material, and makes his book a fascinating and important read.

Rating:
Summary: Gambling for Grace
Review: This is the third book by Jackson Lears and it confirms his status as one of the most innovative of American intellectual historians. Like his previous books "No Place of Grace" about late 19th century conservative intellectuals, and "Fables of Abundance" about American advertising, his approach is idiosyncratic, and not easily summarized. His work uses a large amount of literary allusion, so as "Fables" invoked Little Nemo and examined Henry James and Joseph Cornell, in "Something" Cornell makes a return appearance, along with Mark Twain, Damon Runyon (of course) and a special examination of "Invisible Man."

Lears' book is based on a contrast between a "Culture of Chance" and a "Culture of Control." Naturally, the growth of science has helped to vastly strengthen the latter against the former. But it is not that simple. There is a clash between differing Christian, indeed Protestant, views of grace. Is grace granted unconditionally, freely, like the winner of a game of chance? Or is it a matter of Divine Providence which, if not saying salvation is earned by merit, does strongly state that the hard working self made man either will get success or deserves the success he gets. Lears discusses this in a nuanced and subtle reading of the theologian Paul Tillich. One the one hand he was promiscuous and power-hungry ("not an attractive combination, in a theologian or anyone else") and his view of grace could be fashionable, dangerously naive and convenient. But there was something important, that recognized the link between grace and chance. "...Tillich had recaptured a key element in the religion of Jesus..."

It is at this point that one must demur. As a Jew, and as a critical historian I must object to any view that attributes to Jesus the ideas of grace that were developed by Paul, Augustine, Luther, Calvin or by American theologians. If there is one constant flaw of American Protestantism, both liberal and conservative, whether evangelically Orthodox or Mormon/Jehovah's Witness heterodox, it is to attribute to first century Palestine beliefs which could only have developed in the United States. Although more sophisticated than most, Lears (and the late Christopher Lasch) fall to this temptation. Another problem is that Lears does not discuss the flip side of grace. Damnation can also be awarded freely, and with no right of appeal. And if most Protestants believe they will be saved, for much of the first few centuries of Protestantism its theologians assumed most of their fellow Christians were doomed, while the non-Christian majority of humanity did not have a chance. To the extent that American Protestants no longer believe this, it is not simply the result of glib positivism, complacent pro-capitalism or sinister and sentimental "therapeutic" motifs.

"Something" is also weaker than "Fables" because it is often repetitive and less coherent. Nevertheless there is much of value for the reader here. He discusses the culture of chance in America and its roots among Europeans, Africans, and Indian Americans (rather tellingly, there was a "virtually complete absence" of cheating among the last group). Although gambling is often addictive and harmful, and clearly an unjust way of raising revenues, the culture of control's critique is often moralistic, and fatally unimaginative. There is much discussion of the social pretensions of gamblers, and their tendency to cheat. Particularly interesting is how the culture of control slowly increased its influence in the 19th century, while at the same time euphemizing or ignoring those trends in science which undermined it. Chance could be tamed by the scientific study of probability, and later public opinion poll surveys and Tayloristic management. Darwinism's undermining of conscious design and teleology could be ignored. But ultimately anthropologists developed more sophisticated understandings of what people had long dismissed as "superstition." The crude positivist certainties were undermined as non-Euclidean mathematics and quantum physics arose.

The best chapter is the penultimate one, "The Persistent Allure of Accident," in which Lears notes the recovery of chance in modernist literature like Joyce and Proust. We see the influence of Chance in Cubism, Dadaism, and Surrealism. And we see Chance's sway in Abstract Expressionism, the Beats and John Cage. But this allure has its own weaknesses. Lears points out that the risk-taking persona could degenerate into a pose. In particularly nuanced readings Lears points out that the Beats could collapse into misogyny and solipism, and Cage's work could contribute to postmodernist triviality. But there was another, more fruitful side in both Cage and the Beats, a theme best represented in Robert Motherwell's desire not to be the slave of chance, but its partner. If chance and grace are not to by synonoms for solipsism, that we have to remember "to recognize the role of other people in the creation of grace." Now that is a gamble we all have to take.

Rating:
Summary: Gambling for Grace
Review: This is the third book by Jackson Lears and it confirms his status as one of the most innovative of American intellectual historians. Like his previous books "No Place of Grace" about late 19th century conservative intellectuals, and "Fables of Abundance" about American advertising, his approach is idiosyncratic, and not easily summarized. His work uses a large amount of literary allusion, so as "Fables" invoked Little Nemo and examined Henry James and Joseph Cornell, in "Something" Cornell makes a return appearance, along with Mark Twain, Damon Runyon (of course) and a special examination of "Invisible Man."

Lears' book is based on a contrast between a "Culture of Chance" and a "Culture of Control." Naturally, the growth of science has helped to vastly strengthen the latter against the former. But it is not that simple. There is a clash between differing Christian, indeed Protestant, views of grace. Is grace granted unconditionally, freely, like the winner of a game of chance? Or is it a matter of Divine Providence which, if not saying salvation is earned by merit, does strongly state that the hard working self made man either will get success or deserves the success he gets. Lears discusses this in a nuanced and subtle reading of the theologian Paul Tillich. One the one hand he was promiscuous and power-hungry ("not an attractive combination, in a theologian or anyone else") and his view of grace could be fashionable, dangerously naive and convenient. But there was something important, that recognized the link between grace and chance. "...Tillich had recaptured a key element in the religion of Jesus..."

It is at this point that one must demur. As a Jew, and as a critical historian I must object to any view that attributes to Jesus the ideas of grace that were developed by Paul, Augustine, Luther, Calvin or by American theologians. If there is one constant flaw of American Protestantism, both liberal and conservative, whether evangelically Orthodox or Mormon/Jehovah's Witness heterodox, it is to attribute to first century Palestine beliefs which could only have developed in the United States. Although more sophisticated than most, Lears (and the late Christopher Lasch) fall to this temptation. Another problem is that Lears does not discuss the flip side of grace. Damnation can also be awarded freely, and with no right of appeal. And if most Protestants believe they will be saved, for much of the first few centuries of Protestantism its theologians assumed most of their fellow Christians were doomed, while the non-Christian majority of humanity did not have a chance. To the extent that American Protestants no longer believe this, it is not simply the result of glib positivism, complacent pro-capitalism or sinister and sentimental "therapeutic" motifs.

"Something" is also weaker than "Fables" because it is often repetitive and less coherent. Nevertheless there is much of value for the reader here. He discusses the culture of chance in America and its roots among Europeans, Africans, and Indian Americans (rather tellingly, there was a "virtually complete absence" of cheating among the last group). Although gambling is often addictive and harmful, and clearly an unjust way of raising revenues, the culture of control's critique is often moralistic, and fatally unimaginative. There is much discussion of the social pretensions of gamblers, and their tendency to cheat. Particularly interesting is how the culture of control slowly increased its influence in the 19th century, while at the same time euphemizing or ignoring those trends in science which undermined it. Chance could be tamed by the scientific study of probability, and later public opinion poll surveys and Tayloristic management. Darwinism's undermining of conscious design and teleology could be ignored. But ultimately anthropologists developed more sophisticated understandings of what people had long dismissed as "superstition." The crude positivist certainties were undermined as non-Euclidean mathematics and quantum physics arose.

The best chapter is the penultimate one, "The Persistent Allure of Accident," in which Lears notes the recovery of chance in modernist literature like Joyce and Proust. We see the influence of Chance in Cubism, Dadaism, and Surrealism. And we see Chance's sway in Abstract Expressionism, the Beats and John Cage. But this allure has its own weaknesses. Lears points out that the risk-taking persona could degenerate into a pose. In particularly nuanced readings Lears points out that the Beats could collapse into misogyny and solipism, and Cage's work could contribute to postmodernist triviality. But there was another, more fruitful side in both Cage and the Beats, a theme best represented in Robert Motherwell's desire not to be the slave of chance, but its partner. If chance and grace are not to by synonoms for solipsism, that we have to remember "to recognize the role of other people in the creation of grace." Now that is a gamble we all have to take.