Malcolm Gladwell is one of the most successful North American authors in our world today. Since 1996, Gladwell has written for The New Yorker. His first two books, The Tipping Point (2000) and Blink (2005) both made The New York Times bestseller list, as did his next three books. Readers adore Malcolm Gladwell. And who can blame them? He is an unbelievably talented writer with an ability to retell bland scientific reports in such a way that readers won’t want to put down the book. He’s funny, engaging, and you leave his books feeling like you’ve been let in on the next scientific breakthrough.
Despite the success, Gladwell has been subjected to serious criticism as his popularity increased. The problem? Gladwell’s writing relies heavily on anecdotes to convey his point, including everything from Airwalk shoes to the forged kouros statue at the Getty Museum. His easy to read, relatable style makes these stories into fascinating reads. However, it is when Gladwell tries to pull these anecdotes into a deeper meaning where he struggles, perhaps because of his training as a short story writer for The New Yorker.
In particular, McGill graduate and Harvard professor Steven Pinker shared a particularly scathing review of Gladwell. According to Pinker, the issue lies in the fact that Gladwell simply interviews one expert on a subject and reaches his conclusions from that interview. “When a writer’s education on a topic consists in interviewing an expert,” Pinker wrote. “He is apt to offer generalizations that are banal, obtuse, or flat wrong.”
Stephen Bailey at The Guardian points out that Gladwell really does not develop that strong of an argument. In Blink, readers are left confused as to whether or not rapid judgement is actually better than deeply considered decisions. He offers anecdotes to how each is beneficial. On one hand, there is the instance in which the Getty Museum purchased a Greek statue despite numerous art experts noting that the statue just didn’t look right. On the other, after performing poorly with blind taste tests, Coca Cola dramatically altered their recipe in a way that ended up being hugely unpopular with consumers. So which is best?
Gladwell’s critics do share some fair points, but ultimately, this criticism would not be so elaborate if not for Gladwell’s overwhelming success. He is able to accomplish what so few writers can - making science popular. How many average people would read about the research of Paul Eckman’s Facial Action Coding System in their own time? The hundreds of muscular combinations would bore us, or be too complicated for us to understand. Gladwell succeeds because he serves as the liaison between scientific thinkers and the average person. Sometimes, the average person needs that simplification in order to enjoy and comprehend what they are reading.
It is no secret that Malcolm Gladwell is a master of the essay. His anecdotes present fascinating tidbits of social science that appeal to a vast majority of readers. Perhaps he is guilty of oversimplifying in many instances, however, how can we blame him? Malcolm Gladwell is not a scientific writer, he is a popular journalist. He knows how to entertain us, and we will continue to gobble up his books time and time again.
No comments:
Post a Comment