Customer Reviews

Ishmael

5 star:		(598)
4 star:		(142)
3 star:		(57)
2 star:		(47)
1 star:		(115)

 

 

I've read several reviews of this book and found that, despite Quinn's careful attempts to get his message across clearly and unequivocally, many readers misunderstand the finer points of Ishmael's arguments and end up praising or condemning Ishmael for the wrong reasons. Here is a short list of common misunderstandings you're likely to encounter in the course of reading reviews of this book:

(1) The central message is a hackneyed statement about saving the planet: All we have to do is this or that. We need to treat the earth better, or treat each other better, etc....

No, the author has no such message. He is not even concerned with saving the planet. He merely points out that, in the past, there were many ways a human could make a living in the world that did not threaten to render the planet uninhabitable. As George Carlin once said: "The planet isn't going anywhere. We are!" The author recommends that if we are concerned about our future, then we should find out as much as we can about these other ways of living in the world and what made them sustainable.

(2) This is communism.

No, this is tribalism, the cultural traits of which have been found to be conducive to sutainable ways of living.

So-called communist countries operate the same unsustainable lifestyle as so-called democratic countries and are just as hierarchical and corrupt. Nothing new, except the academic devaluation of the individual. In "democratic" countries, the devaluation is not openly professed, only practiced and theoretically implied. Progress means the same thing in both societies: the technological displacement of people.

(3) The ape is omniscient; skeptics beware.

Skeptics always beware. Ishmael is the ultimate skeptic. He takes nothing for granted. His arguments are based on information available to any human being with a library card. You'll remember that when the student enters Ishmael's room, he notices dozens of books on history and anthropology piled up on the shelf. You don't have to take Ishmael's word for granted. If you're skeptical, go look it up. The ape is not omniscient. He's well informed.

(4) The book proclaims: "There is something unnatural about the way we live."

I agree. There is nothing natural about the way we live. But there's nothing natural about the way any human has ever lived.

There's never been an all-natural people. We are and have always been all-cultural. Nature supplies us with the urges to satisfy certain life imperatives (i.e. nutritional, procreative, protective, etc...). But culture determines the way we go about responding to these urges; that is to say, there is nothing natural about the way we satisfy these natural desires. We may be at a loss to change our nature and the urges we feel, but we are capable of constructing a better, more sustainable way of responding to nature's edicts.

(5) Based on the arguments of the book, one could conclude that "we, as a species, are...."

Quinn has nothing conclusive to say about humanity or "we as a species," except that every human is dependent on culture and that the bulk of the information that constitutes human cultures is mythological. His main concern here is with the general evolution of two distinct ways of living on this planet. One is sustainable, the other is not. We as a species have not messed things up. One culture out of tens of thousands has managed to make a mess of things. By engaging in unsustainable behavior that threatens to destroy the ecosystems upon which humans everywhere depend (i.e., totalitarian agriculture), we - the people of a single culture - are precipitating the extinction of humankind.

It is a general rule that any particular culture can only be understood by someone outside of it - a neutral observer, unaffected by prejudice or indoctrination. This is the reasoning behind Quinn's choice of a gorilla named Ishmael as the main character of this novel, who conducts a series of dialogues analyzing the whole of civilization itself.

But what is the civilization that Quinn looks at? Instead of muttering about monumental building and written language, Quinn treats civilization in a method that is becoming increasingly popular: as the result of a critical mass of humanity that makes possible rapid advances in knowledge and science. For this to be possible, intensive agriculture must be used to raise the population density to such a point that civilization occurs.

So Quinn uses a gorilla as an outsider looking in and perceiving the reality of civilization - of cultures using intensive agriculture to dominate the world. His conclusions are for the most part negative: he concludes that civilization is not sustainable in the long term (that is, over millions of years).

The observations used to come to this conclusion are relatively well-known; that civilization is the greatest disaster to befall earth in the past 65 million years. In terms of pollution, deforestation, extinction, and overall negative impact to the web of life itself, humanity is supreme among all the species. What Quinn does not share with the others who know these facts is a belief that civilization will overcome any difficulties it encounters. Civilization, to Quinn, is the problem, not the solution.

_Ishmael_ is the presentation of these ideas in a Socratic method from a gorilla to a man "with an earnest desire to save the world." There isn't really any plot to this book, nor does Quinn intend there to be. The disappearance of Ishmael at the end of book is the only story-like element in _Ishmael_, and it is really an attempt by Quinn to set the reader free - to encourage him/her to think about civilization for himself rather than be told about it by a telepathic gorilla. I've always had the feeling that this should be considered nonfiction, rather than a story.

The problem presented by _Ishmael_ is simple: civilization is the problem. The solution is both simple and complex: in order to preserve a human niche in the ecosystem, we must go beyond civilization. Working to figure out just what this means is one of the great joys of reading _Ishmael_, whether or not you agree with Quinn's assessment of the situation. _Ishmael_ is a book that will make you look around and think, and perhaps reach some conclusions that you may find surprising. Highly recommended.

This book's been alternately excessively hyped and criticized. Some of the reviews on this page make me question whether those reviewers and I read the same book. The book's arch premise is highly focused (not simplified) in order to successfully posit its all-embracing point: human beings are ignorantly destroying the world in which they live. It's not a book about a return to primitive man, neither is it about ideas already understood by most people; if that were the case, corporate greed, mindless militarism and fetishistic destruction of the environment would not be the cataclysmic problems they have assuredly become. There's a good deal of honest wisdom in the pages of Ishmael despite the quasi cultic aspects found on the ishmael.com website. This is a book that can help teach people in this society to listen. THAT's its erstwhile contribution. Try this experiment sometime: note how often you experience someone say they "listened to" something (a book, another person, the circumstance of any human quandary) and contrast it with the number of times you hear people say they "heard" something. The results of this simple little survey will astonish you. THAT's the value of the tale of teacher Ishmael. Until any society that measures its wealth by consumption is converted to a culture that listens, any hope for the necessarily radical reconfiguring of the means and the end is a pipe dream. The book addresses that condition with insight, a superbly original idea, an intriguing 'hero' and a genuine push for a wakeup call that fairly charges out of the author from beginning to end. Great literature it ain't - a critical choice is what's revealed, and it's powerful.

Some quotes that have caused me pause:

"The earth is on the brink of environmental collapse because the evil white people have forgotten that the world does not belong to them."

"Its central tenet - that human beings, through their total disregard for the world around them, are destroying the Earth"

Way to miss the boat.

First of all, in no way is Quinn saying humans are a disease, that white people in particular are a disease, or that "Western Civ." is responsible. Quinn is saying that for millions of years humans existed on this planet without conquering it, and that that they did so sustainably. It is not "human beings" that are responsible, it is the "produce or die" culture that's responsible.

Jean Jacques Rousseau posited that the greatest crime in the history of humanity was when one person fenced off an area and said "this is mine." The rest is, unfortunately, history. It is not that we're human, it is how we are living. We are under the delusion that there is no other way to live - but we have 3 million years of shared "non-history" to point to to show that before our culture, humans lived just fine, thank you. Since our culture's inception, we have been on the track to disaster - War, Famine, Slavery, Plague - all fruits of this cultural tree. And with no one even considering the possibility of changing course (and frankly, why would they when the rewards are "comfort" and "wealth"), there is nothing but a great brick wall at the end of this tunnel to look forward to.

This book is not meant to do anything more than wake us up from the mind-numbing hum of the culture that tells us there is no other way to live. It is not meant to offer solutions - how we choose to act upon waking up is not Quinn's responsibility. He's not a guru - he's a thinker, and while his prose may be muddy (God - some of that dialogue can be interminable) his ultimate goal is achieved. We cannot, having read this book, say that we are unaware that for millions of years, people did not live as we lived - and they thrived. Of course, the definition of "thrived" has changed under the "one right way to live."

As it stands, we have maybe another 30-50 years before we (and by WE I don't mean "Americans" or "Africans" or "Asians" or anything of the sort - I mean "Participants in the "produce or die" lifestyle) hit the wall at the end of the tunnel. We produce more than we can consume, because to do so affords us "wealth" and "comfort." As a result, our population climbs steadily, and keeps climbing, though it's dangerously high right now. Quinn is saying that in the other story we enacted for millions of years, wealth was not measured by digits in a bank account, and comfort was not measured by the number of products we could buy after slaving on this cultural pyramid.

The message is - "Look around you and ask: - is there another story that we could be enacting? What kind of damage are we doing to ourselves and this world by enacting this one? Can we enact another before it is too late?"

Other authors have gone further and offered solutions. Skinner (Walden Two), Callenbach (Ecotopia), Schumacher (Small is Beautiful) are some good examples.

It's a wake up call. And in that, I must say it is an unmitigated succcess.

Much like the One Book for Waterloo this year, Hominids by Robert J. Sawyer, this book looks at the history of humankind on this planet and all we have done to it. It will challenge the prevailing belief that more and bigger is better. The book begins with an ad in the paper "TEACHER seeks pupil. Must have earnest desire to save the world. Apply in Person." In the book, the gorilla Ishmael has learned to communicate through thought with humans. He also has a message that we cannot afford not to hear. The book focuses around a series of conversations between Ishmael and his student. It presents a different interpretation of how we went from being a hunter-gather society to an agrarian one. Also how that system is bound to fail. For me the most haunting thing in the book is two quotes. Early on we see a poster that states: "WITH MAN GONE, WILL THERE BE HOPE FOR GORILLA?" p.9 and much later, on the back of the first poster, "WITH GORILLA GONE, WILL THERE BE HOPE FOR MAN?" p.263. This is a great read especially for a sunny summer afternoon, or two. This is also the first in a trilogy.

Yes, the philosophy behind Ishmael is a simple one.

Yes, the writing is basic, slowly paced, sometimes repetitive, and barely backed up by any data.

Yes, many of us have encountered similar beliefs elsewhere, or we came up with them ourselves in high school.

A few people have said this, and I'd like to reiterate: in the end, it doesn't matter. It's an important book.

I'm amazed at how many people have sneered at this book, dismissing it by saying, "Everyone already knows this, idiots." Do they really? Maybe they did discover it for themselves in high school, but many of those people (myself included), thought that we were alone in thinking the way we did, or listened to Mother Culture's insistence that human "progress" was inexorable. This book is a reassuring reminder that many of us humans do know how to live, and that minds are being changed. Granted, I wouldn't recommend that anyone's education be based solely off Ishmael. Read it, and then go out and keep reading. You want evidence? It's out there, being written by scholars with more scientific credibility than Daniel Quinn. Check out his website at www.ishmael.com if you want to know what he recommends for additional reading, or just go out and explore on your own.
To those critics who claim to "already know" everything in this book: do you really? If so, why are you spending so much time trying to discredit it? A key part of the book, perhaps THE key part, is that this knowledge does no good if it isn't shared. So you've studied the works of great philosophers and noted ecologists? Good! I am genuinely glad. But if you really buy into the ideas presented in this book, then help to teach them instead of cynically blasting Quinn's approach. He may not help everyone, but he helped me, and I know I'm not alone.

I would also be suspicious of any reviews which claim that the book promotes the ideas that humanity is "bad" or "a virus", that the book is racist, anti-semetic, anti-christian, or anything of the sort, that the book is anti-technology, or that the book promotes the idea that we have to return to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. Quinn takes pains to distance himself from all these criticisms, and those who make them need to read a little more carefully.

Since this is supposed to be a review (not a review of other people's reviews), I highly recommend this book. Though it may not be for everyone, I encourage anyone with even the slightest interest to give Ishmael a shot. If you're skeptical, try a friend or a library, but I'm confident that many of you will want this on your shelves for years to come.

This is not an easy book to review. Billed as "A Novel," futurist Daniel Quinn's tale of humanity's condition and fate on the planet is really only a "novel" in the same sense that James Redfield's "The Celestine Prophecy" was labeled a "novel:" Ishmael is basically about the author's philosophy and a set of teachings, wrapped in a thin veneer of very minimal storyline. The core lesson? Sustainability is essential to our survival. That's the "short version." Now....

I expect some of you will have come here because the book is "required reading" in a philosophy course; or perhaps because you heard about it and have an interest in philosphy. And you will no doubt find it "annoying" that the author has tried to write a "story." Others may be considering this as a "novel," and you will probably be disappointed that there really isn't much "story." Because there isn't, and you'll most likely find Quinn's slightly "preachy" style offputting. If you've read some of the other 500+ reviews, you probably noticed that most of the negative comments had to do with confusion over what the author "is trying to do."

Thus, in order to get something out of this book, I suggest that you abandon any need to make it fit a "genre," and instead just consider the underlying philosophical message. If you enjoy discussions about "The Meaning Of Things," you could well enjoy this book. If you consider yourself a "Serious Philosopher" be aware that "Ishmael" is quite introductory-level in its presentation.

That said, Ishmael is the "story" of a teacher and a student. The teacher (and also Quinn's "mouthpiece" for conveying his philosophy) is a telepathic gorilla; the student is the man who answers an unusual ad in the paper: "TEACHER seeks pupil. Must have an earnest desire to save the world. Apply in person."

The book presents Quinn's interpretation of the tale of humanity. As we progress through the book, we learn about the "hows" and "whys" of "The Way Things Are" in our modern world, and "how they got to be this way." Ishmael (the gorilla) uses a variation on "Socratic teaching" to guide his student to drawing his own conclusions. Finally, Ishmael (Quinn) presents us with some possible solutions to change the inevitably apocalyptic scenario that represents humankind's final destiny, should we continue along our current path. Whereas a solid 80-90% of the book is dedicated to conveying the author's philosophy, we're occasionally sidetracked by the thin thread of "plot," there to remind us that we're ostensibly reading a novel, rather than a philosophy text.

Quinn's ideas center around the premise that at some point, humanity decided that it was no longer subject to the basic "laws" of nature and the universe. He argues that our ensuing problems with pollution, overpopulation, hunger, disease, crime and a host of other issues can be traced back to the point when we decided to no longer follow the "Gods," but instead to BECOME those "Gods," bending the world to our perceived needs and whims; and creating our own definitions as to what is absolute "good" and "evil." Along with this, we developed our "civilized" habits of taking more from the Earth and the Universe than we actually need. End result? 1000s of species dying, and eventually we will succumb, as the natural end game of a process we started, ourselves. Please note that I use the term "Gods" very loosely in this paragraph, as this is not a religious book.

From a philosophy standpoint, the book succeeds, in as much as it makes us think about life, and our future on this planet. From a "story" standpoint, there's not much there. Overall, I found "Ishmael" to be an enjoyable and fairly easy read, and I think the somewhat "general" nature of the book is attributable to the fact that Quinn is essentially using it to "set the stage" for a subsequent series of books that go on to explore his philosophy in greater detail.

Final thoughts: Well worth reading (9 out of a possible 10 bookmarks). If you have an open mind, and an interest in "big pattern thinking," it's not a stretch to understand why "Ishmael" is as awarded and talked about as it is. Potentially, a life-altering book-- but you MUST "think outside the box."

A friend of mine recommended this book to me in 1992. When she described to me the book's premise, a dialogue between a telepathic gorilla and a not-so-subtly dense man, I have to admit, I was not exactly eager to buy a copy. Thankfully, she persisted, and when finally she just presented me with a copy of it, I began to read... and read... and read... to find that she was right when she told me that what the book is actually about is something you have to read for yourself to discover.

My history prior to reading Ishmael had involved efforts to address problems regarding the environment and social justice. I had always been frustrated at the conventional devices for change, never quite able to communicate exactly where my frustrations lay. I did know that my frustrations were rooted in a sense that what I was doing was having little more effect than trying to stop a dam from breaking by stopping up the cracks with tissue paper. I also knew that the changes needed were much more than any amount of political persuasion, noble savage idealism, scientific sequestering, philosophical masturbation, or religious transcendentalism could possibly produce.

It has been seven years since my first reading of Ishmael, and this book's profound impact on me, my goals, and my overall cosmology has not wavered since, but has in fact increased exponentially, particularly with reading Mr. Quinn's follow up pieces, The Story of B and My Ishmael. In Ishmael, Daniel Quinn manages to cut to the heart of our culture's various ailments without resorting to any of the expected conventions of our time. The reason for this, as Mr. Quinn clearly illustrates, is that these conventions are as much a result of our culture's ill paradigms as the problems they occasionally attempt to remedy.

But this does not even begin to touch on the depth of insights contained in this masterful work. Mr. Quinn synthesizes numerous schools of thought - primarily anthropology, history, biology, and theology - in such a way as to paint a truly all-encompassing portrait of how we got here. Most importantly, he successfully fleshes out the root of what it will take for any significant and lasting change to be made.

The premise of the conversation between man and ape is more a metaphorical framework, a vehicle for the eye-opening ideas therein, than a device to provoke an emotional response. Nonetheless, one cannot help feeling a sense of loyalty and affection for the humorously smug (and rightly so) gorilla we come to know as Ishmael.

And we owe a debt of gratitude to the book's fictitious narrator. His dense skull need not be taken personally as an estimation on Quinn's part of the mentality of his readers. It is a practical device that makes this book comprehensible to even those readers with little prior understanding of the laws of biology, the principles of evolution, or the various other foundations of this piece, and merely requests the patience of those readers who do have knowledge of such subjects. And for those readers who find this man's ignorance occasionally frustrating, you will find humor and respect in how Ishmael himself responds. At least, if you do not, you will find a role model for the patience you will need to develop if you wish to be a part of provoking such change yourself.

My involvement and concern for issues such as the environment and social justice have not wavered either, but have merely changed their expressions... to ones more effective in the long run and with a deeper, more practical understanding and a sense of hope that I had not known before.

Deeper and more profoundly mind-altering than any book on conspiracy theories, celestine prophecies, or back-to-the-woods survivalism - by the simple virtue of its depth and profundity laying in its unabashed stripping of our cultural mythologies - Ishmael is truly a book for any reader with an earnest desire to save the world.

This book alone reshaped how I think about everything. It is a narrative dialogue between a gorilla and a naïve, disgruntled young man. The man represents a common cultural icon, the kind we all know too well: unhappy, hopeless and confused. The gorilla: wise, challenging and viewing the world of humanity from an animal's perspective. Ishmael, the gorilla, takes the narrator onto a journey of humanity while challenging the him to see humanity, and its role on this planet, in a way never before told. What's more is that everything Ishmael brings out is confirmed by the work of anthropologists, philosophers, biologists and ecologists, and, unlike others who question humanity's position in life, Ishmael questions whether we need prophets. A new way to live is more on his agenda, and it may follow the model lived by humans for millions of years: the tribe. This book is touching, easy to read and difficult to grasp. I've read it six times, taught it as a high-school unit twice, and I still haven't received all that is presented in here. I joined an Ishmael email list for some time and discovered most of the people on there saw Ishmael as some New Age guru telling us to eat a vegetarian diet and live simply. (Needless to say, I quickly left that list.) I recommend this book selectively--because I'm not sure many who read Ishmael actually understand it.

I'm not going to lie and say that Ishmael is the new criterion for all to live their lives by. Not even close. We all have acknowledged that many of mankind's endeavors have been destructive; some believe that the threat we pose to the world is criminal and evil, and some seek to deny the magnitude of our situation. Ishmael doesn't address either audience. Rather it begins from the very locus of homo-sapien development. It describes the fallacies of "civilized" culture and how most of mankind operates on principles that are directly contradictory to the natural law of things. So? What's the point? The point is that many of nature's grievances against humankind are presented in a coherent fashion to the readers of the book. These points are compiled in the unlikeliest of dialogues; that between a man and a gorilla.
Before you write Ishmael off as more left-wing, tree hugger propaganda against the good SUV loving people of modern society, take a good look at Ishmael. It focuses on universal truths that are evident in nature, but absent in mankind. It talks about all of our problems clearly, adopting a rational approach (one even a monkey could understand, pun intended) in order to effectively point out our faults. It speaks volumes about our culture myths, our firm beliefs, our egocentrism, and our disregard for life in general.
Yes, there's a gorilla telling us about these things. Yes I'm serious. The plot isn't the best, but that's not what the book is about. In order to appreciate this book, you definitely have to forget about human perspectives, the same ones that have been indoctrinated in us since the earliest of ages. Why are all of our belief structures based on humanity? The point is that our mindset has evolved so much from the Neolithic revolution that our perspectives just don't include other creatures. At its simplest, Ishmael is another book on protecting wildlife and not cutting down rainforests. But at it's best, the book really evokes emotion. It's focuses on Man's destiny as a whole, and the way things ought to be instead of how they are. Mankind's ways are foolish; they disregard the natural hierarchy that is critical to so many creatures. We take advantage of our position on the food chain to grossly and wantonly exploit our environments to better suit our luxurious debaucheries. The use of the gorilla in the book is aimed at adopting the point of view of nature, and attempting to reach out one last time before mankind destroys itself.
Ishmael addresses specific issues also. It takes a wise approach to the population crises we see in many parts of the world. It allows one to gain perspective in a way that highlights the current problems with overpopulation and points to future threats. Ishmael's proposal for abridging the problem is shocking at first, but as the story progresses and mankind's destructive role gains clarity, one concludes that we have no alternative. We need to make a choice in the near future about whether or not we want to be concerned with the natural equilibrium of things. If it means letting people starve and taking away reproductive rights, then can we do it? Is our very humanity our biggest hurdle in allowing us to do what's right? How do we act on the issue?
Ishmael teaches issues in the book, he doesn't give too many answers. That left me with odd feelings about the book. Now that the issues have been raised, shouldn't we discuss plausible ways by which we can solve them? What can one man do? Ishmael seems to have this peaceful observer role in the book but why cant he transcend that and actually become and arbiter to our problems? He asks us to make the choice but doesn't tell us how to do it our which ones to make. I think that's unfortunate because once a book like Ishmael raises concern, it is in the best possible position to present possible solutions. Quinn fails to. From what I have heard, the solutions are in other books. Is this a weird marketing ploy to get us to buy more books? I don't know, but it sure is weird.
Ultimately, we all have acknowledged the damage we have done to our environments. Many of us suppress it. But no matter how big your SUV is or how much you pollute, somewhere in the annals of your heart, you are aware of your ramifications on the environment. This book raises those feelings beyond sentiment and forces you to analyze them. You begin to ask yourself questions about your existence, about God, about your ambitions, and your way of life. Do you still want to be a "taker"? If you don't, do you necessarily want to become a "leaver"? This book acknowledges that our lives are "stories" that we are dedicated to enacting. Our mother culture defines us by our superiority to other beings and challenges the natural laws of interaction. It tells us to wipe out other species for our convenience and allows us to sleep at night regardless of the horrors we have committed against nature. It is simply wrong. It cannot be continued. We will destroy ourselves and our environments if we continue disregarding our actions and blindly enacting the story of superiority we have concocted for ourselves.
Ishmael espouses this idea in every page. It ultimately works up to a climax where the reader has to make personal decisions. For me it was about the general direction of my life and my outlook on where I am going as opposed to where I should be going. It was removing myself from my beliefs of human myths and egocentrism. I don't want to continue enacting this story any more, but I wish I knew how to stop. How can the message of Ishmael impact humankind in its entirety and relay its message to them? I think that was the ultimate point in the book. The whole book takes a teacher-student format, subtly telling us to carry on the message, and that when we educate ourselves, we will be able to collectively do something about it.
After all those thoughts and issues, I guess I can say Ishmael is a book that needs to be read. Is it pivotal? To a certain degree. It just revealed to me the suppressed knowledge that everyone has. We are not being just with ourselves or our environment. It went into specifics and rationally explicated many critical issues, but I came away acknowledging that the rat race was just another weird machination of devolution. We need to make a choice, whether to continue our "taker" ways or to merge with nature again. I just wish I knew how to do make that choice.