Customer Reviews

I May Not Get There with You: The True Martin Luther King, Jr.

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Dyson has written an excellent antidote to the annual Martin Luther King Day speeches we hear every year, many of which make him out to be black Santa Claus. King has become a generic figure, an empty vessel into which all good wishes may be poured annually. We have forgotten that Dr. King was a threat to entrenched power in this country, and that his critique of American life was far-reaching and radical. Dyson does a good job of reminding readers of how much we've forgotten about this remarkable visionary prophet, and of how far we have to go to fulfill his vision. Having said that, Dyson did little if any primary research for this book; the sources are all familiar. Nor is he very careful in sorting them. The book is poorly edited. Sometimes Dyson is silly, unctious, pretentious or obtuse. There are whole chapters that could disappear without harming the book. He's an approachable writer with a likable voice and good ideas, but hits too many false notes and frequently trips over his own ego. I repeat, this book needed a real editor. It's worth reading, and much better than anything else Dyson has done; this project seemed to bring out his best work.

Dr. Dyson presents a side of history that truly exemplifies what he terms America's, "cultural amnesia." As we come to the end of celebrating another King Holiday, the sanitization of his [King] legacy is artfully critiqued by Dyson. Providing the reader an alternative lens, Dyson's propositions takes you on a journey which may--as it did me-- force you to confront deeply-rooted ideologies about King and the civil rights era. This lens guided my journey from admiring him solely as civil rights revolutionary to new paths of understanding including his beliefs about socialism, the Viet Nam War, and woman's rights. A must read for those seeking new insights about King's multi-faceted and intriguing public / private persona.

Dyson presents a full picture of MLK with all of his strengths and weaknesses. He writes of MLK's brilliant speaking ability, his unshakeable courage, and his willingness to fight for the oppressed, while at the same time, he truthfully acknowledges that King chased women and plagiarized. Dyson included a lot of lesser known facts about King and presented them in a way that brought King's foibles to light without attacking the underlying goodness of his character. For that, this book is a worthwhile read.

At the same time, however, Dyson is at times extremely hard to take seriously. He goes into a long, long comparison between King and Tupac Shakur, which is laughable at its best, insulting at its worst. How can one take seriously a comparison between a great civil rights leader who advocated nonviolence and universal love, with a hip hop artist who made a living off a culture that glorifies drugs and violence? What I especially don't understand is how he palliates any reason for the comparison (quoting Chris Rock's statement that King was "assassinated" while Tupac was "shot" and that "we still go to school on [Tupac's] birthday") and then compares them anyway.

Dyson also attacks those who he claims "misuse" King's teachings. At the same time, he himself misuses King's teachings to attack the conservative elements of the black church. He describes King's philanderings as a moral slip, then he attacks the black church for being against premarital sex. While Dyson is certainly entitled to his own views about premarital sex, it most definitely does not apply in a book about King, a man who never voiced support for anything of the kind.

The book is worth reading, but I'd probably suggest getting it from the library, just because it'll annoy you to own such a crazy and far-out interpretation of history. I'm hoping another King scholar will take up this same project, but that he/she will do so in a manner more befitting for one of our nation's great heroes.

I have always been fascinated with Dr. King as one of the most influential leaders of the 20th century. I love the work that Dr. Dyson did in writing this book, because he is authentic in talking about Dr. King the man - strengths, weaknesses and all - while exposing the myths about him. Being African-American, I can understand why many within our community woud want to scold Dr. Dyson for exposing Dr. King's dirty laundry. I, however, consider it not only essential, but relevant that we talk about the true humanity of our leaders (espcially one as esteemed as Dr. King) to avoid the danger of us elevating them as idols. It is a great reminder that God uses people (albeit flawed people) for magnificent works in a fallen world. This is a great book that I highly recommed!!

Michael Eric Dyson intends to reveal the "real" Martin Luther King, Jr., whom he posits was a much more radical figure than he is currently remembered as being. To what extent he has succeeded, and to what extent his argument is colored by his own politics, I am really not competent to say. I do think that his characterization of Shelby Steele's The Content of Our Character: A New Vision of Race In America is inaccurate. One great strength of Dyson's approach is that he understands that communication occurs in a context. So often, I read biographers who examine their subjects' statements as if they were all the result of intensive self-scrutiny, delivered under oath. In fact, without necessarily being dishonest, communication is shaped by its purpose: persuasive people address the audience's concerns, rather than merely expressing their own. Dyson often analyzes King's statements with regard to the intended audience.

I found the book thought-provoking, but somewhat uneven; sometimes I was gripped, other material could only have improved the book by being dropped. Chapter Five, "Black Power", is somewhat vacuous. I was left with the feeling that Black nationalism is an idea that Dyson swears loyalty as proof that he is "authentic," but has little concrete meaning. The contention by Dyson's colleague that begins the chapter, and his response, bears out the suspicion that academics strive to prove the first Grand Duke of Fenwick's contention that yes can be turned into no if one just talks long enough. Personally, I have always thought that Plato, with his Ideals, was the one sitting in a cave looking at shadows, and this is all too abstract for me. I don't really accept Dyson's assumption that freeing Blacks from the ghetto or enhancing Black self-esteem is inconsistent with integration or that Clarence Thomas is the model of an integrated African-American, especially at this stage, let alone that it is King and not George Bush who put him on the Supreme Court. Even if this were a color-blind society, which it is not, all Blacks would be unlikely to all be like Thomas. Dyson holds up the still severely segregated school system as an example of how integration may have cost African-Americans more than they gained "Segregated schools provided a culture of expectation in which black students were taught that they could perform well," and then says, "Studies show that black students in integrated schools complete more years of schooling ... and make higher wages than their segregated peers." The latter sounds more like integration, unfortunately, failed to be successfully enacted, not that it was a bad idea. Worse, the idea of Black Power remains rather nebulous: what does it mean to Dyson, and more to the point, what did it mean to King? If Dyson means this book for non-Black people, he may need to explain more. Dyson's only good point in the chapter is that the Black church, from which King drew so much strength, is the greatest Black institution that has ever existed.

Dyson's later psychobabble (chapter 8) about what King's adulteries meant to him strikes me as equally empty. Personally, I don't have heroes: there are people that I admire for particular accomplishments and traits. I could admire no-one and nothing if I held out for perfection, and I'd have no friends if they were waiting for me to be perfect. So I agree emphatically with Dyson that King's personal misconduct does not negate his enormous public accomplishments. I wish that he had left it at that.

Dyson also takes the opportunity to go off on a tangent about Hip Hop (chapter 9). He compiles a long list of similarities between King and Tupac Shakur, but many of them do not rise much above the fact that they were both men and both black, while others involve traits that King considered to be his flaws. As Dyson has repeatedly warned us not to be overly reverential, he might ask whether he elevates Shakur or denigrates King. At several points, Dyson acknowledges the significant point that the difference is that King regretted his less admirable traits and the Hip Hop artists seem to celebrate them, but then he ignores that insight for most of the chapter. The best he seems to be able to come up with is to argue that Hip Hop artists are also angry, but it is what King did with his anger that made him great.

I also wonder about how fair Dyson was to the King family (chapter 12). He mentions in the middle of the chapter that the Southern Christian Leadership Conference was insensitive to the needs of a family with modest means suddenly bereft of its breadwinner. Coretta King's attempts to profit by King's legacy are not systematically reviewed in light of her need to support a family, let alone her desire to create the King Center. King's failure to provide for his family in the event of an early death that he was sure was coming may be seen as a failing to equal his marital infidelities. Dyson is a bit vague about the King family's track record as activists, especially Coretta King, which would give them a bit more moral standing. Still, Dyson raises some very good points about the difference between inheriting copyright and inheriting moral standing. I found this to be one of the most interesting chapters.

Praise, unfortunately, always seems to be briefer than criticism; this is a book worth reading for those contemplating the legacy of King and remembering the distance that we still have to go. Be sure to read the notes, as they often contain a great deal of information, and can be very interesting. The book includes a bibliography and index.

I was caught up in this book because it made Dr. King a living man, not an icon. Dr. Dyson's intellectual pretensions notwithstanding(hooking up Dr. King with rapppers?) he does bring history home and shows us the type of man we all knew, similar to other bright colleagues who were not as famous. His bibliography is terrific but the writing could be more in depth and not come off as an attempted apology. King was a philanderer. So what? Most powerful men and women are. But don't justify it on some holy basis. He was just weak in some circumstances and hopefully, sought forgiveness with his God.

An uneven book marred by bad chapters. For instance Chapter 9 tries to relate King to rappers. Did Dr. King swear and use profanities in his speeches from the pulpit? Also there is overuse of rhetoric, repetitiveness and useless digressions (or rants). Is it necessary to know what Mr. Dyson thinks of Clinton - this is a digression.

Nevertheless there are some good critiques. King did not allow women a proper place in the `movement' - the SCLC. For Dr. King women appeared to be playthings.

Also there is good criticism of King's successors - namely Coretta and family in chapter 13.

I agree with Dr. King's message of harmony and peace. At the same time I can appreciate Dyson's exposure of aspects of King's personal life that most authors do not address (an obvious exception is "And the Walls Came Tumbling Down"). In a very real sense it leads to questioning Dr. King's sincerity in asking others to value the character of a person and not the color of their skin. Dr. King was an admirable figure in American history; I wouldn't go as far as the author in saying he might be the most important American ever; that's a bit over the top. I've read a lot on the subject; this book is worth reading.

I was contemplating not reviewing Michael Dyson's work because some of the other reviews hit the nail right on the head, however I suppose it is good to reiterate. The book is a great introduction to the Martin Luther King forgotten or abandoned by contemporary society; that is the socialist, militant, and moderate black nationalist Dr. King. If you are unaware of these philosophical currents in Dr. King's later work this book will come as an enlightening and thought provoking take on one of the 20th centuries greatest visionaries. Dyson quotes King at length thorough out the book to demonstrate his points and MLK's positions.

However, for every pro the cons are present in equal weight. Dyson's prose are not great making the book read choppily at times. Whoever edited the book (if anyone at all) should certainly be released from service. Furthermore, the book adds nothing to the broad array of work on Martin Luther King. Even for being written in 2000 the book has very little new information to offer the reader that they could not have encountered elsewhere from earlier sources; the scholarship just isn't there. The book feels as if Dyson did very little primary research. The only real plus of the book is it consolidates the less well-known aspects of MLK's life into one work, eliminating the need to flesh out dozens of earlier works.

If I could give the book 2.5 stars I would because I'm totally ambivalent, split between appreciating the book and feeling as if Dyson could have done much better. I would recommend it to the neophyte just beginning there research on the world's greatest social visionary, not anyone who is already well-versed looking for a different take on the topic.

This book was not what I expected, but enjoyed regardless. I particularly liked his idea of banning the 'I Have a Dream' speech from public media. The stories about his philandering were a bit shocking to me, but I have never read any biography of King before, so I wasn't prepared. The ocassional tangents might irk some, but understand Dyson has to take some risks and expand on ideas to make the book worth his time. Realize the civil right movement is not over. Dialogue needs to continue in written forms such as this book to make progress.
- logan square yuppie