Ishmael: An Adventure of the Mind and Spirit

Reviews (See all 2,157) Write a reviewfor this

It's a hit!

This book had a huge effect on who I am. I read it when I was 18--changed my life.

I only wish that Daniel Quinn were a better writer. These id... (show more)

This book had a huge effect on who I am. I read it when I was 18--changed my life.

I only wish that Daniel Quinn were a better writer. These ideas under an adept pen would sweep the world. (show less)

 

 

by Facebook User

No, it's a flop!

There was one solid gold nugget buried in the heaping, steaming pile of literary cow dung that was this book. For that one tantalizingly fascinatin... (show more)

There was one solid gold nugget buried in the heaping, steaming pile of literary cow dung that was this book. For that one tantalizingly fascinating idea, I am happy that I read this, but it was a struggle to muddle through prior to and after the little nugget ran it's course.

Firstly, the author is a professional writer, and not a very good one at that. He is not a biologist or ecologist. As a biologist, I found myself wanting to yell in frustration at the miriad faulty data and shaky theorems the author based his even shakier arguments upon.

The idea that crime, alcoholism, violence, etc. does not occur in the animal world, or even in the "Leaver" world (tribal societies such as the Native Americans or tribal Africans) is simply false. The phenomena of rape is well documented in mallard duck populations. Male lions systematically murder non-genetically linked offspring when they take over a new pride. Alcoholism is a problem Native American populations struggle with just as any other human population. We could go on ad nauseum. The foundations for this guy's arguments are shoddy and not well-researched. Like I said, this guy is a writer, not a biologist or ecologist.

Unfortunately, this guy is also a terrible writer. The story goes nowhere. In the ninth inning he tries to inject some sort of plot by moving the gorrilla around. Sad, sad, sad. We never get to know who the protagonist is. He has no introduction, personality or character development. He's never even given a name. For some reason, though, the reader is treated to snippets of his work schedule, car troubles, bar hopping, and relatives visiting. The writing was just wretched. The dialogue ping ponged back and forth so much often the reader lost track of who was talking.

The one fascinating idea that cropped up came in the last 1\3rd of the book. The author proposed that the first 4 chapters of Genesis parallel the agricultural revolution and indicate a hostile overrun of neighboring tribes (pastoral and hunter\gatherers) by the agriculturalists. I don't know if I believe this or not, but it's captivated my imagination for a few days now. I don't know if it's worth reading the rest of the drivel for.

As the book wrapped, very little was offered by way of fixing what is perceived to be wrong with the world. No solutions were outlined. As a biologist, the solutions I expect are being inferred are not feasible without a decimation of human population, which would mean stepping away from modern medicine, allowing famine and disease to take it's natural course. I don't think the author has fully explored the ramifications of what he's leading the reader to. The ethics of abortion, euthanasia, selective in vitro fertilization all play into the author's quaint idea that we should embrace natural selection and stop trying to manipulate and thwart our environment. I don't know about you, but I'm not willing to give up on a child born with special needs, or stand by and watch while an entire population dies from famine or a preventable disease. (show less)

 

 

by Lisa Edison Carroll

More Reviews

• 
  

  A profoundly thought-provoking book about how the history of (most of) mankind, beginning with the Agricultural Revolution, has led to the ability and even desire to destroy the planet. I would call this the best book I'd never heard of, and I wish I could give it to every member of congress. Quinn forces the reader to recognize driving elements of our society that most people (including myself) were completely blind to. He endeavors (and succeeds) to set down laws abided by almost every soci... (show more)

  A profoundly thought-provoking book about how the history of (most of) mankind, beginning with the Agricultural Revolution, has led to the ability and even desire to destroy the planet. I would call this the best book I'd never heard of, and I wish I could give it to every member of congress. Quinn forces the reader to recognize driving elements of our society that most people (including myself) were completely blind to. He endeavors (and succeeds) to set down laws abided by almost every society in the natural world, and points out how our society (which he arbitrarily calls "Taker" society) has excepted ourselves from these laws. The result, as he points out, is overpopulation and destruction of the environment.
  While Quinn succeeds in exposing many raw ideas driving our culture and in painting a bleak picture of the future, his prescription for how to help ourselves appears weak and implausible. Nevertheless, he declares that his point is to raise awareness of the danger so that others can find solutions, not to propose a solution himself.
  The narrative in the story is almost irrelevant (this is really an essay in disguise), and yet charming in its simplicity and ability to meld the only-too-possible (a sudden chipped tooth, problems with a crappy car at the worst moments) with the mind-bending impossible (Come on -- the main character is learning from a gorilla. Who communicates through telepathy). Nevertheless is is just enough to successfully embed Quinn's values into a storyline and even benefits from the book's mainly question-answer format.
  To anyone interested in the environment/the future of mankind/the reasons driving mankind's history: I highly recommend this book.
  To anyone *not* concerned about the environment/future of mankind/history of ideology: I CANNOT RECOMMEND THIS BOOK HIGHLY ENOUGH. (show less)

   

   

  by Facebook User on May 23, 2009 at 02:04AM

  Already read

  Is this review helpful? yes no
   
• 
  

  Central to this book is the notion of "takers" vs. "leavers".

  Takers (aka our modern society): we take, or consume, the maximum that we can, resulting in the eventual destruction of society.

  Leavers: those who live in harmony with the world.

  In my sophomore year class where this was discussed, many wide-eyed peers gushed about how right this book was, and how our society needed to change. The teacher, of course, pushed this view as well. In the kindergarten view of vie... (show more)

  Central to this book is the notion of "takers" vs. "leavers".

  Takers (aka our modern society): we take, or consume, the maximum that we can, resulting in the eventual destruction of society.

  Leavers: those who live in harmony with the world.

  In my sophomore year class where this was discussed, many wide-eyed peers gushed about how right this book was, and how our society needed to change. The teacher, of course, pushed this view as well. In the kindergarten view of view, leaving and sharing is better than taking and hoarding, so of course it made sense to everyone.

  The thesis was demolished when one obstinate peer identified different names for the same categories: "thrivers" and "survivors."

  Few people just want to survive. It's in man's nature to want to thrive. That means taking.

  Some claim that the book's primary fault is in the device of the talking gorilla. It is, but not for the reason that gorillas don't talk. The fault of this device is that Quinn uses it to extoll his beliefs in a boring discussion format with a simple-minded straw man that asks easy set up questions which Ishmael demolishes. It implies a debate when it's really just a long-winded FAQ about a philosophy. (show less)

   

   

  by Michael Komarnitsky on May 15, 2009 at 07:45PM

  Already read

  Is this review helpful? yes no
   
• See all reviews
  Write a review