Yesterday, I read at Maud's that Alain de Botton's newest book, Status Anxiety will appear in the U.K. next month and in the U.S. in May. A three part documentary, based on the book, will be broadcast starting Saturday March 6th on Channel 4 in the UK, and in Australia on the ABC starting Sunday, June 20th. Three clips are available online. Judging from them, the documentary is a fair multimedia translation of de Botton's work: the author v.o.'s summaries of major philosophers' work over kitschy visuals and Muzak.
I have an awkward relationship with de Botton's work. On one hand, I relate to his project of using fiction to write essays, of privileging ideas over plot and character; in this sense, de Botton has been a role model or -- here, admitting my vanity -- a competitor with the advantage of being born before me. From an old identity theory interview:
RB: I read Kiss & Tell. That was essayistic?On the other hand, my love for his work is purely theoretical. The experience of reading it is painful. His ideas, in my opinion, hit their marks but bounce off them, too flimsy to penetrate. In examining everyday life in simple language, the risk is that precision will give way to banality, and the reward is that the subject matter will unearth observations that are both unusual, new and fresh, and honest, familiar, true. De Botton is as banal as he is earnest, and as earnest as he is superficial, overly content that his structure and his aims are more important than his writing and ideas.AB: Well, yes. I think so. Really, it was a reflection on different ideas. The point was not the plot so much as the ideas in it.
RB: Well, it more closely resembles fiction than what you have gone on to write since then.
AB: Exactly. Nevertheless, it wasn't totally straight fiction and I suppose I was just trying to move closer to what I felt was where my real interests lay. Which is in a non-fiction structure but which can allow for a certain amount of personal digressions and descriptions and some of the things that tend to belong in a novel.
RB: I wonder if the reason Consolations of Philosophy was critically rejected here was because the homegrown philosophy of the USA is pragmatism, which eschews 19th century models of philosophical systems?Though I'm better read in continental philosophy than I am in analytical, I find it interesting to think that something in American culture is inimical to de Botton's style. My guess: because we do have Philosophy for Dummies and Hegel in 60 Minutes (that one's sitting on my bookshelf), we might not have the same need as other cultures for more popularized philosophy. And, given that Philosophies for Dummies wins no acclaim, and garners no major reviews, we're not sure why books like The Consolations of Philosophy should. But I'm open to other theories. Anyone out there a die-hard de Botton fan? Posted by nchicha at February 19, 2004 01:12 PMAB: With all due respect, I don't think that's at all the reason. The real reason is that it was felt by highbrow critics to be uncomfortably close to the dumb side of America. So that there is this terrific fear on the highbrow coterie, "Where is that line between the good guys and Hollywood, the bad guys, Disney etc.?" I think with the Proust book they felt, "Here's a guy, he is actually flirting with the idea he is lowbrow, but actually he's clearly high brow. P-r-o-s-t, P-r-u-s-t, we don't know how the word is pronounced, but clearly this must be highbrow even though he's playing around." So they went along with the joke. And suddenly I come along with The Consolations of Philosophy, which was written in a very similar way, but somehow people felt, "Well, actually he's gone too far." So this is like Who Moved My Cheese, Tuesdays with Morrie, or whatever that guy is.
RB: Philosophy for Dummies?
AB: Exactly. So there was that charge. It surprised me as a European. Here I am being accused of dumbing down America. This was on the part of Americans who presumably had their philosophical training in that rather austere analytic school of philosophy. Emerson's view of philosophy has disappeared from the American campus. You could not now take an Emersonian view of philosophy. That was a kind of irony because the guiding figure behind The Consolations of Philosophy is, in a way, Emerson. But Emerson has disappeared off the curriculum. His style and the idea of a democratic language with which to address ordinary issues has disappeared. In the reception to my book one can make a mini history of American intellectual attitudes.
Not a 'die-hard' fan, but I have a lot of time for him (although I'm told he's insufferably arrogant and pretentious in person). When I first read a novel of his I loved it, the second one his style was starting to grate and I couldn't get past the first twenty pages of the third. I think it's for exactly the problems with his writing which you articulate, although I didn't really understand it in those terms at the time. Incidentally, it's fascinating the way he breaks so many tenets of fiction writing that's generally promoted - always telling, never showing etc. I also think that the main problem with his philosophy books and the American market is pretty much what the interviewer here proposes: Americans like - or book publishers think Americans want - actionable solutions to their problems (Find A Rich Husband In Six Easy Steps! etc) whereas de Botton's brand of life teachings is so different. Personally I think everyone should read Consolations...
Posted by: Emma on February 20, 2004 10:29 AMI enjoyed "Consolations..." but I was a philosophy major. Loaned it to a friend who showed no interest at all.
I remember reading a quote from Hornby commenting on Botton. It seems that by naming his book How Proust Can Change Your Life, he sold several hundred thousand more copies than was projected. Most people thought it was a self help book.
I bought it but never read it. Was it any good?
But Chicha is spot on in that he is to flimsy to penetrate. But for what it is - not a bad read.
As to his fiction - I haven't a clue. I didn't even know he wrote fiction.
Posted by: laudanum on February 21, 2004 12:11 AMDe Botton? He’s a schmuck: the Consolation’s (an insult to Boethius) is the single most atrocious piece of philosophy I’ve ever encountered – and I’ve encountered alot. Rendering philosophy some form of herbalist self-help manual, he dilutes it down to the point of vacuity, to the point of dross. Philosophy is strenuous: no pithy handbook of attractive maxims or condensed ideas are going to convey the implications of any philosopher worthy of the title. And De Botton is certainly not a philosopher. Besides which – what the hell is going on with his hair?!
Posted by: Dylan on February 22, 2004 12:39 PMI loved "Consolations...", but was disappointed rather than surprised to find Alain de Botton had been accused of dumbing down. Most people don't make the effort with philosophy because they assume they won't understand it (or, more annoyingly, that it just isn't relevant - I remember taking a philosophy exam a few years ago and being asked by an acquaintance what the use was of learning it): is making philosophy accessible to those who might otherwise be intimidated (or exasperated) by it so reprehensible?
I think much of de Botton's writing could be regarded as something like an abridgement of a very long book. You don't really feel like investing the necessary effort in the whole text when you don't know whether you'll like it, but you read an abridgement and it inspires you to read the thing in its entirety. De Botton outlines the thoughts of several philosophers in "Consolations", for instance, which you're likely to be inspired to go on and read about further.
I can't help wondering whether those who accuse the likes of de Botton of dumbing down just don't like the idea of ordinary people understanding "their" allegedly highbrow ideas...
Posted by: Aimee on March 9, 2004 08:02 AMthe book was pure utter pish, ive never been so bored in my life!! DIE MAN!!
Posted by: Curtis on March 10, 2004 03:59 AMI was surprised to read that you lot dislike de Botton so much. I did find «Status Anxiety» rather superficial. On the other hand: There are worse reads after a 12-hour-day's work. And the book almost changed my life after I started considering whether my boyfried would visit me on my deathbed. But perhaps I belong to the dumb ones.
Posted by: philemon frogg on March 31, 2004 04:54 AM
hot blog-on-blog action