Download Ebook Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman
Merely connect to the internet to get this book Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman This is why we mean you to use and also make use of the developed modern technology. Checking out book does not imply to bring the printed Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman Established technology has permitted you to check out only the soft file of the book Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman It is same. You may not have to go as well as obtain traditionally in looking guide Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman You may not have sufficient time to invest, may you? This is why we offer you the best means to get guide Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman currently!
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman
Download Ebook Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman
Do you think that reading is an important task? Locate your reasons why including is vital. Reading a publication Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman is one component of delightful tasks that will certainly make your life top quality much better. It is not regarding simply exactly what kind of publication Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman you read, it is not only concerning the amount of books you review, it's about the habit. Checking out habit will be a method to make e-book Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman as her or his pal. It will regardless of if they invest money and also invest more e-books to finish reading, so does this e-book Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman
Sometimes, checking out Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman is very boring and it will certainly take long time starting from obtaining guide and begin checking out. However, in contemporary era, you can take the establishing modern technology by making use of the internet. By internet, you could visit this page and begin to hunt for guide Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman that is required. Wondering this Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman is the one that you require, you can go with downloading and install. Have you understood ways to get it?
After downloading and install the soft data of this Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman, you could begin to read it. Yeah, this is so enjoyable while somebody must review by taking their huge publications; you remain in your new means by just manage your gizmo. Or perhaps you are working in the workplace; you can still utilize the computer system to read Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman fully. Obviously, it will not obligate you to take several web pages. Merely page by page depending on the moment that you need to check out Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman
After understanding this quite easy method to check out and also get this Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman, why don't you tell to others regarding this way? You can inform others to visit this website as well as choose looking them preferred books Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman As recognized, here are lots of lists that offer lots of type of publications to accumulate. Just prepare few time as well as net connections to get guides. You can actually delight in the life by reviewing Eating The Dinosaur, By Chuck Klosterman in a really simple way.
After a bestselling and acclaimed diversion into fiction, Chuck Klosterman, author of Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs, returns to the form in which he’s been spectacularly successful with a collection of essays about our consumption of pop culture and sports.
Q: What is this book about?
A: Well, that’s difficult to say. I haven’t read it yet—I’ve just picked it up and casually glanced at the back cover. There clearly isn’t a plot. I’ve heard there’s a lot of stuff about time travel in this book, and quite a bit about violence and Garth Brooks and why Germans don’t laugh when they’re inside grocery stores. Ralph Nader and Ralph Sampson play significant roles. I think there are several pages about Rear Window and college football and Mad Men and why Rivers Cuomo prefers having sex with Asian women. Supposedly there’s a chapter outlining all the things the Unabomber was right about, but perhaps I’m misinformed.
Q: Is there a larger theme?
A: Oh, something about reality. “What is reality,” maybe? No, that’s not it. Not exactly. I get the sense that most of the core questions dwell on the way media perception constructs a fake reality that ends up becoming more meaningful than whatever actually happened. Also, Lady Gaga.
Q: Should I read this book?
A: Probably. Do you see a clear relationship between the Branch Davidian disaster and the recording of Nirvana’s In Utero? Does Barack Obama make you want to drink Pepsi? Does ABBA remind you of AC/DC? If so, you probably don’t need to read this book. You probably wrote this book. But I suspect everybody else will totally love it, except for the ones who totally hate it.
- Sales Rank: #69322 in Books
- Published on: 2010-07-06
- Released on: 2010-07-06
- Original language: English
- Number of items: 1
- Dimensions: 8.44" h x .90" w x 5.50" l, .59 pounds
- Binding: Paperback
- 304 pages
From Publishers Weekly
In his new essay collection, author and cultural commentator Klosterman (Chuck Klosterman IV) parallels Kurt Cobain with David Koresh, Weezer with Warner Herzog and Ralph Nader, and posits a future in which Unabomber Ted Kaczynski's manifesto is viewed as "the most prescient work of the 1990s." In short, there is something to excite and/or enrage any reader engaged with popular culture in the last 20 years. One of few cultural essayists to enjoy a wide readership, Klosterman's Lester Bangs-lite approach is frequently engaging, if scattershot; too often, he engages in fleeting pop-culture references that evoke the laziest kind of critical cred-grubbing (a typical throwaway jab at indie band TV on the Radio leaves readers with no idea what criticism, if any, Klosterman is leveling). Klosterman even neglects to engage some of his subjects on their artistic merits, such as Nirvana's final album, In Utero: after making much of the disc's pre-release hype, he all but refuses to discuss his reaction as a listener. Even with the inclusion of an article on football (which he admits will turn off "40 percent" of his readers), Klosterman never ventures outside of his comfort zone; though he thrives on challenging his readers, he fails to challenge himself.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
About the Author
Chuck Klosterman is the New York Times bestselling author of seven previous books, including Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs; Eating the Dinosaur; Killing Yourself to Live; and The Visible Man. His debut book, Fargo Rock City, was the winner of the ASCAP-Deems Taylor Award. He has written for GQ, Esquire, Spin, The Washington Post, The Guardian, The Believer, and The Onion A.V. Club. He currently serves as “The Ethicist” for the New York Times Magazine and writes about sports and popular culture for ESPN.
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Something Instead of Nothing
1 For the first twelve years of my adult life, I sustained a professional existence by asking questions to strangers and writing about what they said.
"Why did you do it?" I would ask these strangers. It did not matter what it was. "What were you thinking while you did that? Did it satisfy you? What does it mean to be satisfied? Do you consider yourself to be famous? How does it feel to be famous? How did this experience change you? What elements didn't change? What will never change? What drives you? Are you lying to me right now? Why should I care about what you are saying? Is this all a construction? Are you constructed? Who constructed you? What was their purpose? Does God exist? Why or why not? Thank you very much. It was great meeting you in the lobby of this unnecessarily expensive hotel."
This has been a tremendous way to earn a living. Who wouldn't enjoy getting paid for being curious? Journalism allows almost anyone to direct questions they would never ask of their own friends at random people; since the ensuing dialogue exists for commercial purposes, both parties accept an acceleration of intimacy. People give emotional responses, but those emotions are projections. The result (when things go well) is a dynamic, adversarial, semi-real conversation. I am at ease with this. If given a choice between interviewing someone or talking to them "for real," I prefer the former; I don't like having the social limitations of tact imposed upon my day-to-day interactions and I don't enjoy talking to most people more than once or twice in my lifetime.
2 For the past five years, I've spent more time being interviewed than conducting interviews with other people. I am not complaining about this, nor am I proud of it -- it's just the way things worked out, mostly by chance. But the experience has been confusing. Though I always understand why people ask me the same collection of questions, I never know why I answer them. Frankly, I don't know why anyone answers anything. The obvious explanation is that the interviewee is hoping to promote a product or a concept (or the "concept of themselves," which is its own kind of product), but that's reductive and often untrue; once a media entity makes the decision to conduct and produce an interview with a particular somebody, the piece is going to exist regardless of how the subject responds to the queries. The interviewee can say anything, even if those sentiments contradict reality. They can deliver nothing but clichés, but the story will still run. On three occasions I've consciously (and blatantly) attempted to say boring things during an interview in the hope of killing the eventual article. It only worked once. But this type of behavior is rare. Most of the time, I pretend to be interesting. I try to frame my response in the context in which the question was asked, and I try to say things I haven't said before. But I have no clue as to why I do this (or why anyone else does, either).
During the summer of 2008, I was interviewed by a Norwegian magazine writer named Erik Moller Solheim. He was good at his job. He knew a lot of trivia about Finland's military history. We ate fried pork knees and drank Ur-Krostitzer beer. But in the middle of our playful conversation, I was suddenly paralyzed by an unspoken riddle I could not answer: Why was I responding to this man's questions? My books are not translated into Norwegian. If the journalist sent me a copy of his finished article, I could not read a word of it. I don't even know what the publication's name (Dagens Naeringsliv) is supposed to mean. I will likely never go to Norway, and even if I did, the fact that I was interviewed for this publication would have no impact on my time there. No one would care. The fjords would be underwhelmed.
As such, I considered the possible motives for my actions:
1. I felt I had something important to say. Except I did not. No element of our interaction felt important to me. If anything, I felt unqualified to talk about the things the reporter was asking me. I don't have that much of an opinion about why certain Black Metal bands burn down churches.
2. It's my job. Except that it wasn't. I wasn't promoting anything. In fact, the interaction could have been detrimental to my career, were I to have inadvertently said something insulting about the king of Norway. Technically, there was more downside than upside.
3. I have an unconscious, unresolved craving for attention. Except that this feels inaccurate. It was probably true twenty years ago, but those desires have waned. Besides, who gives a fuck about being famous in a country I'll never visit? Why would that feel good to anyone? How would I even know it was happening?
4. I had nothing better to do. This is accurate, but not satisfactory.
5. I'm a nice person. Unlikely.
6. When asked a direct question, it's human nature to respond. This, I suppose, is the most likely explanation. It's the crux of Frost/Nixon. But if this is true, why is it true? What is the psychological directive that makes an unanswered question discomfiting?
Why do people talk?
3 Why do people talk? Why do people answer the questions you ask them? Is there a unifying force that prompts people to respond?
Errol Morris: Probably not, except possibly that people feel this need to give an account of themselves. And not just to other people, but to themselves. Just yesterday, I was being interviewed by a reporter from the New York Observer, and we were talking about whether or not people have privileged access to their own minds.
Privileged access?
EM: My mind resides somewhere inside of myself. That being the case, one would assume I have privileged access to it. In theory, I should be able to ask myself questions and get different answers than I would from other people, such as you. But I'm not sure we truly have privileged access to our own minds. I don't think we have any idea who we are. I think we're engaged in a constant battle to figure out who we are. I sometimes think of interviews as some oddball human relationship that's taking place in a laboratory setting. I often feel like a primatologist.
Do you feel like you know the people that you interview? Because I feel as though I never do. It seems like a totally fake relationship.
EM: I don't feel like I know myself, let alone the people I interview. I might actually know the people I interview better than I know myself. A friend of mine once said that you can never trust a person who doesn't talk much, because how else do you know what they're thinking? Just by the act of being willing to talk about oneself, the person is revealing something about who they are.
But what is the talker's motive? Why did you decide to talk to the New York Observer? Why are you talking to me right now?
EM: Well, okay. Let's use the example of Robert McNamara. Why does McNamara feel the need to talk to me -- or to anyone -- at this point in his life? Because there's a very strong human desire to do so. It might be to get approval from someone, even if that person is just me. It might even be to get a sense of condemnation from people. Maybe it's just programmed into us as people. McNamara also had this weird "approach-avoidance" thing: He agreed to do the interview because he assumed I was part of the promotion of his [then new] book. I called him around the same time his book was coming out, and he thought it was just part of that whole deal. When he realized it was not, he became apprehensive and said he didn't think he was going to do it. But then he did, and it went on for well over a year. In fact, I continued to interview him for a long time after that movie was finished, just because I found it very interesting.
But why did McNamara keep talking?
EM: He said he enjoyed talking to me. That was his explanation.
2A While working for newspapers during the 1990s, I imagined that being interviewed by other reporters would be fun. I assumed answering questions would be easier than asking them. This proved completely untrue. The process of being interviewed is much more stressful than the process of interrogating someone. If you make a mistake while you're interviewing someone else, there is no penalty (beyond the fact that it will be harder to write a complete story). But if you make a mistake while being interviewed -- if you admit something you'd prefer to keep secret, or if you flippantly answer a legitimately serious question, or if you thoughtlessly disparage a peer you barely know, or if you answer the phone while on drugs -- that mistake will inevitably become the focus of whatever is written. As a reporter, you live for those anecdotal mistakes. Mistakes are where you find hidden truths. But as a person, anecdotal mistakes define the experience of being misunderstood; anecdotal mistakes are used to make metaphors that explain the motives of a person who is sort of like you, but not really.
4 "The people who come on This American Life have often never heard of our show, or have never even heard of NPR, so they have no idea what the conversation is going to be. It's very abstract. And we're on the frontier of doing journalism that's so personal, no normal journalist would even consider it. That's part of it. It's hard to resist whenever someone really wants to listen to you. That's a very rare thing in most of our lives. I'm a pretty talky person who deals with lots of sensitive people every single day, but if someone really listens to me and cares about what I say for ten minutes in the course of a day -- that's a lot. Some days that doesn't happen at all."
[These are the words of Ira Glass, host of This American Life, the tent-pole program for most National Public Radio stations. It was later turned into a television show for Showtime. Glass has an immediately recogniza...
Most helpful customer reviews
56 of 60 people found the following review helpful.
Satisfying Meal
By The Ginger Man
Klosterman does not go for the easy joke here; although he is consistently and absurdly amusing. Neither is Eating the Dinosaur a mere collection of pop culture references; although Mad Men, Nirvana, ABBA, The Fog of War and other mentions abound. What raises this book to a 5 star rating is the author's ability to weave humor and pop culture into genuinely insightful analyses of issues both important and sublime.
He starts with a very funny and equally revealing essay about why people answer questions during interviews. Just as the reader recognizes that this is not nearly as obvious a matter as it seems on first blush, Klosterman enters into a discussion of the nature of truth and of selfhood. Errol Morris contributes this gem: "I think we're always trying to create a consistent narrative for ourselves. I think truth always takes a backseat to narrative." (This would explain why each of my satellite radio news channels tells me about events in seemingly different worlds.)
Klosterman is less serious but just as interesting in exploring the challenges inherent in time travel. Even it were possible, he argues, the only reason to do so would be to eat a dinosaur.
His dissection of advertising through the medium of Mad Men and Pepsi is subtle and persuasive. He tries to convince us that we understand we are being conned by the ad. However, we reward the message that does the best job of setting the hook because we want to be a part of the process.
His best piece finishes the book and rather courageously tries to resurrect the Unabomber's arguments in Industrial Society for the Future without creating any sympathy for Ted Kaczynski. Klosterman shows how 130,000 years of psychological evolution, in which men observed actual images, have been replaced in one century by mediated experience. The media that the author has made a living writing about has created a new and false reality. "We are latently enslaved by our own ingenuity, and we have unknowingly constructed a simulated world, " concludes the author. "As a species, we have never been less human than we are right now."
Eating the Dinosaur is a lot to swallow. Whether the reader accepts its conclusions or not, however, consumption is both fun and enlightening.
29 of 30 people found the following review helpful.
Klosterman's Weakest Collection - Maybe
By A. Ross
I've read (and generally enjoyed) all of Klosterman's books (even the novel), so whenever he has a new one, I pick it up right away. I tore through this skimpy one in about two days, and on first read was disappointed to find it to be among the least engaging of his work. I say "first read" because I'm kind of tempted to set it aside to revisit in a year or so. The problem with Klosterman is that he is usually so entertaining that one tends to read him quickly, eager to come across the next clever line or hilarious juxtaposition. But in the case of this book I realize that I may not have wholly engaged with the larger ideas he's writing about. And since many of the essays in this book take on bigger themes than those his previous books, it might be worth a second, slower read.
That caveat established, my initial impression is that this is Klosterman's weakest collection. Yes, is has the trademark humor, clever turns of phrase, and entertaining contrarian pronouncements. But the humor's not as everpresent, more of the pronouncements struck me as definitively wrong, and the level of navel-gazing seems to be ratcheted up. What I mean by that is most of his earlier work felt like the ideas and observations were just gushing out of his head, almost uncontrolled. Here, he seems to be working a great deal harder to figure out just what it is he's trying to say, and what that says about him. On the plus side are essays like "Something Instead of Nothing," a genuine attempt to understand why people answer interview questions. Another good one is "Oh, the Guilt," a rambling but interesting attempt to link the personalities of Kurt Cobain and David Koresh with the concept of authenticity and their resulting fates. I also quite liked the final piece, "Fail," which is a reconsideration of the Unabomber Manifesto and its relevance to our current internet-addicted society. There's a bit about ABBA ("ABBA 1, World 0.") that's quite in line with much of his earlier work and a good analysis of a pop culture phenomenon.
However, many of the essays simply don't work. For example, in "What We Talk About When We Talk About Ralph Sampson" Klosterman attempts to parse how people react to the failures of public figures. I was really curious to see what he had to say about the basketball player who was my favorite player during his college years (Klosterman and I are the same age). But his conclusions are pretty facile and the route he takes to get to them is awfully convoluted and muddled. Similarly, as a lifelong pro football fan, I was curious to see what he has to say in "Football: Liberal or Conservative?" Unfortunately, his conclusion that football is somehow "liberal" because it embraces change is arrived at through some various dubious logical leaps that dont' stand up to anything beyond a cursory examination. His bit on time travel ("Tomorrow Rarely Knows") has nothing new or interesting to say on the topic, ditto for his one on voyeurism ("Through a Glass, Blindly") and the one on laugh tracks. And his bit on modern advertising ("It Will Shock You How Much It Never Happened") just struck me as completely wrong.
My guess is that if you really like Klosterman, you'll pretty much like this collection. If you mostly like him (like me), you'll read this and find some choice nuggets to extract. If you don't like him, this book won't change your opinion one iota. And if you've never heard of him, start with one of his earlier books, like Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs.
28 of 33 people found the following review helpful.
Pop Culture Philosphy
By Bradley Bevers
On its face, just like the best of his other books, Eating the Dinosaur appears to be a book about the mundane and the fleeting. However, underneath that glossy surface, there are insights into our cultural ethos that are unmatched by other modern works. The essays include:
-----------------------
Something Instead of Nothing: Why do people answer questions? For who's sake? What does that say about us? This is far more interesting than it sounds at first and, I think, provides insight into the current human condition. Interviews and answering questions are odder than you would think.
Oh, the Guilt: What do David Koresh and Kurt Cobaine have in common? Really interesting look at what makes self-made cultic leaders and culturally-created messianic figures different. Great examination of the Waco disaster as well - definitely want to read more about it after reading the little bit included here.
Tomorrow Rarely Knows: An essay about why time travel is impossible. Good, but the information is not very original. I had heard most of this before, but interesting none the less.
What We Talk About When We Talk About Ralph Sampson: Society's Reactions to Public Failures. As a lifelong Houston Rockets fan, I was excited to see this essay. Though the premise and the conclusions are valid, this essay on failure and how it is viewed by society ultimately comes up short. The circuitous route that Klosterman takes to get to his point has a few too many curves.
Through a Glass, Blindly: Voyeurism. The most interesting part of this essay were the discussions of the Hitchcock movies Vertigo and Rear Window. An understanding look at why we watch other's lives. The conclusion that Klosterman comes up with here is right on. This, along with the first essay in the book, deftly describes an individual's desire to be recognized and validated.
The Passion of the Garth: Fictional Reality. I am not a big country music fan and barely remember Garth Brooks' attempt to break into the rock world as Chris Gaines. After three slower essays, this one is great fun. The underlying discussion of created personas and how fiction can be truer than reality takes a back seat to the sheer entertainment value of the piece.
The Best Response. This one is just filler really. The one area that fell very short of Klosterman's best work (Sex, Drugs, And Cocoa Puffs, IV) are the filler questions. There really was not anything worthwhile in between the chapters, and though this grouping of questions is a little better then the filler in the rest of the book, its not by much.
Football: Liberal or Conservative? Great. As an avid football fan, one of my favorites in the book. Not much to say about it besides the fact that if you are a football fan, this one is a must read and almost worth the price of the book. This, along with the soccer essay (S,D, & CP, I think) is the best of his sports essays.
ABBA 1, World 0. Not great. Unclear about the point of this one, and I don't particularly care for ABBA's music.
"Ha, Ha," he said. "Ha, Ha." Canned Laughter. Very good. I always hated canned laughter, but now I know why. Your perception of canned laughter, both on television and in everyday conversations, will change after reading this.
It Will Shock You How Much It Never Happened. Advertising. As a Mad Men fan, this one was good. Though confused about the direction he was headed at times, the conclusion results in a great question about the nature of advertising in today's society.
T is For True: Irony and Its Pervasiveness. A look at the lack of literalism in today's society and what that means for us in the future. This one is a must read and will change the way you think about irony and its effects. One of the best in the book.
FAIL: Technology, Good or Bad. Worth reading for a couple of good points, but one of the weakest chapters in the book. Hard to take even one philosophical insight from the Unabomber and point out its value, but Klosterman succeeds (barely.)
-----------------------
Chuck Klosterman has a unique talent to turn discussions about Nirvana, David Koresh, and Mad Men into philosophical treatises worth reading. Even if you disagree with many, or even all, of his conclusions you cannot ignore Klosterman's insight into pop culture and society. He is the best writer of the "educational & entertaining non-fiction" genre, and Eating the Dinosaur is one of his best.
See all 74 customer reviews...
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman PDF
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman EPub
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman Doc
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman iBooks
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman rtf
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman Mobipocket
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman Kindle
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman PDF
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman PDF
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman PDF
Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman PDF
