What do I know about life on the bayou besides the jazziness of New Orleans' restaurant life next to mystical swamp traditions as depicted in the animated Disney movie featuring my namesake, Tiana---"Princess and the Frog"? A few days ago, I finished "Strangers In Their Own Land" by Arlie Russell Hochschild for the Coolidge book club. It's been a long time since I've read any nonfiction, and certainly for some parts, I felt as if I were reading fantasy. The descriptions of the environmental destruction and disasters caused by these mining companies make Louisiana seem like a surreal landscape. However, Hochschild acclimates readers to the Louisiana lifestyle quickly. My impression was a land of contrasts: damaging forces of industrialization at work in stunning natural reserves, and the people themselves mostly possessing a vigorous appreciation for both. Hochschild was mainly concerned with capturing the feelings of those in Tea Party right, to see if their unique living situation makes it understandable that they would support politicians who go against their self-interest. For the most part, Hochschild succeeds in this goal. Her extended analogy with the "deep story" of the white American Southerner evokes sympathy from the reader. Her explanation for the ascension of Donald Trump, too, cannot be faulted. Her goal was to open minds, not change them---so this insight into the lives of Tea Party Louisianans is valuable for readers who wish to understand the big picture of American politics: often, feelings, especially alongside long-held traditions and history, dictate political direction more than facts.
What are the implications of understanding a white Southerner's feelings of becoming a "stranger in their own land"? Hochschild hopes it might foster more caring and communication, perhaps lead to more friendship and cooperation. In fact, I found a lot of common ground with Louisianans: I, too, value my faith and my community, and know the importance of retaining the honor of self-sufficiency. However, what little Hochschild spoke on actual steps for change---for more regulations on large companies crowding out smaller ones, for more accessible and responsible politicians, for more accountable corporations---did not seem encouraging. The politics and the economics seem to be at an impasse or a continuous feedback loop into spiraling more into debt and dependence on the federal government, more defiance and distrust of the government, more allowances to companies that don't seem to be doing much good. How much good is understanding when people don't take action to right Louisiana's wrongs?
The two articles below are conflicting book reviews on the subject. The New York Times writer loved it for the understanding and compassion it showed. The Washington Post writer thought that attitude was condescending---sure, she's proved that Louisianans' mindsets are reasonable given their cultural situation, but if they would just change their minds---Louisiana could be improved. Their mindsets are the obstacle to improving their own state, and that is condescending.
Personally, I don't think Hochschild approached it with an attitude of condescension. I believe her when she wrote that she genuinely wanted to reach over the empathy wall. My problem with the book was that it seemed incomplete. In all the bleak statistics and accounts of chemical accidents and reports of mismanagement, one statement rang out to me, and it was this quote from sociologist Richard Florida (a name I am just now realizing I recognize from my research project last year on conglomeration and business diversification in the postindustrial Midwest---but that's another story): "Blue state knowledge economies run on red state energy. Red state energy economies, in their turn, depend on dense coastal cities and metro areas, not just as markets and sources of migrants, but for the technology and talent they supply." Evidently, Louisiana's environmental and social struggles are not wholly self-inflicted. Rather, as part of a large national and global trade system, it seems awfully like they are not getting a fair trade. Louisiana sells energy to metro areas, but with falling fossil fuel prices, the state's not getting much of a profit. And rather than being a source of migrants, metro areas are a draw for emigrants from Louisiana, slowly draining it of labor. As for the technology and talent that spreads from metro areas to Louisianans---much of that technology is being used to replace a worker with a machine, and the talent isn't being passed to native Louisianans in the form of education and job training. In my opinion, it seems to me that many more complex market forces stand in the way of Louisiana's success than simply changing mindsets to elect more environmentally aware and frugal politicians, developing more trust in government, and having more understanding between the liberal and conservative points of view. So why doesn't the book address that? It left the problem in the open, but where's the solution?
I rate this book an 8/10 for clearly and powerfully describing the deep story of the South and promoting greater communication and cultural understanding between Americans---no easy task, and admirable. I take away 2 points for leaving a problem in the open without proposing any solutions.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/books/review/strangers-in-their-own-land-arlie-russell-hochschild.html
No comments:
Post a Comment