Customer Reviews

Symptoms of Culture

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I suspect this book might be hit and miss. I found it to be beyond brilliant: witty, erudite, well-researched, and playful, Garber writes the perfect antidote to scholarly conservatism, traditionalism, and stuffiness. The first essay, "Greatness," is a free-associating tour de force that not only perfectly puts her theoretical framework to work (go Freud!), but also reminds us that even those who argue against "ideology" and "politics" work through and with them, whether or not (and especially if they don't) acknowledge it. People who are still comfortably attached to orthodox scholarly beliefs will find this book to be too eccentric and perhaps even evil; the Lynne Cheneys and Camille Paglias of the world must burst into flames at the mere mention of Garber's name. Even those who agree with Garber's politics might find her method of analysis too labyrinthine and airy. I found the method refreshing. (And at least she warns us of it in the beginning.) Overall, the book reminds us that the methods of close reading and the psychoanalytic interpretation of dreams can (and must) be applied to the world around us, reminds us of the importance of reading against the grain, reading between the lines, always questioning and critiquing that which society presents to us as given, inherent, assumed, decontextualized, "real" and "great."

I was required to read this book for a graduate course. As a symptom of what is wrong with American (and Western) culture, it does a good job of exemplifying the absurdity and bigotry of the psuedo-intellectual left. If one approaches it as a scholarly appraisal of Western culture, one will be seriously mis-led.

Garber assumes, in the introduction, that Fruedianism is an authoritative hermeneutical tool for literature and culture generally. One would normally expect a scholar to demonstrate why s/he believes in a certain system of ideas. But apparently Garber approaches Frued the same way a fundamentalist approaches the Bible: Freud said it, I believe it, that settles it. That abitrary approach permeates the entire book -- confirming the worst of what one has heard about the debased (and intollerantly leftist) nature of today's English departments. Later she appeals for tolerance for Jews wearing their caps during sporting events and damns evangelical Christians for praying in public after they score touch-downs. Guess what? She's Jewish. Shakespeare, she says, is a "fetish" and "Charlotte's Web" is a work of comparable literary value. And on and on she goes. This book should be preserved if only to demonstrate how intolerant and debased the academic "left" became in the late 20th century.