Shop now Shop now Shop now See more Shop all Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More Shop now DIYED Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Shop now Shop now Shop now

Customer Reviews

3.5 out of 5 stars
12
3.5 out of 5 stars
Format: Paperback|Change
Price:£12.38+ Free shipping with Amazon Prime
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item


There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on 16 December 2009
Ever bought a self-help book that didn't deliver what it promised? Then Bright-sided is for you. This is a forensic diagnosis of why boundless positive thinking turns our minds to mush, deracinates managers, and helps make us willing believers in economic bubbles.

Ehrenreich has several distinct strands to her book. She kicks off with her experience at the age of about sixty when diagnosed with breast cancer. To her amazement she stumbled across on an entire industry in the US devoted to presenting the disease as little short of the best thing that could ever happen to a woman.

Other chapters analyse how the school of mindless optimism was born with Mary Baker Eddy, fed the subprime scandal and has come to infect mainstream corporate management thinking. Anyone who has sat through a toe-curling session by a motivational speaker at a company off-site will chuckle in recognition.

Ehrenreich has evidently survived her brush with cancer without resorting to a whacky, manic outlook. And her book is far from down at the mouth. It is a good read, sceptical but sane, probing yet witty. There are especially amusing interviews with "positive thinking" gurus at various stages of derangement.

One gap is that she does not discuss cognitive behaviour therapy. This is successful in treating depression by eliminating negative thoughts that tend to reinforce themselves - at least the National Health Service, which now stumps up for the treatment, believes so.

In short, this is a book for grown-ups baffled by the credulity of others, and perhaps their own. A life-changing book? No, but its explanation of how fads have entered the mainstream will certainly generate a wry smile.
0Comment| 16 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 11 November 2009
A brilliant examination and debunking of the positive thinking field over the past century - I always knew that the stuff peddled by the likes of Deepak Chopra, Tony Robbins, Napoleon Hill, Stephen Covey etc. was nonsense and now I know why. The author makes a pretty convincing case for the positive thinking field playing a key role in last year's financial catastrophe and by the end of the book it is clear that the delusion of positive thinking is dangerous - much better to be realistic and rational.
There are a few special mentions for a particular favourite of mine from the field of magical nonsense: Rhonda Byrne's "The Secret". Great stuff.
22 comments| 25 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 4 March 2010
In this brilliant book, Barbara Ehrenreich shows how harmful the `positive thinking' movement is, how it means self-blame, victim-blaming and national denial, inviting disaster. She shows that it wrecks efforts for education, skills and reforms.

She cites a guru who said, "the mind is actually shaping the very thing that is being perceived." There is a long tradition in the USA of this kind of mind-over-matter idealism: it includes William James, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Mary Baker Eddy (the founder of Christian Science), Norman Vincent Peale (The power of positive thinking), Dale Carnegie (How to make friends and influence people), Scott Peck (The road less travelled), Tom Peters (The pursuit of wow), Deepak Chopra (Quantum healing), Oprah Winfrey, and Rhonda Byrne (The Secret). Byrne evilly said that tsunamis only happen to people who are `on the same frequency as the event' - blaming people's personalities for their deaths.

In the field of health, `positive thinkers' tell us that being positive will help to cure cancer. But research has found no such link: see for example James Coyne et al, `Psychotherapy and survival in cancer: the conflict between hope and evidence', Psychological Bulletin, 2007, 133, 3, 367-94, and `Emotional well-being does not predict survival in head and neck cancer patients', Cancer, 2007, 110, 11, 2568-75. So, even if you believe, with Ann McNerney, that, "Cancer will lead you to God" (The gift of cancer: a call to awakening), `positive thinking' won't make you better.

The business world loves positive thinking. The US market for motivational products is worth $21 billion a year and companies use them against their workers. For instance, AT&T sent staff to a motivational event on the same day it announced 15,000 redundancies. The motivator's message? "It's your own fault; don't blame the system; don't blame the boss - work harder and pray more."

Ehrenreich presents us with this striking image: "a candlelit room thick with a haze of incense, 17 blindfolded captains of industry lay on towels, breathed deeply, and delved into the `lower world' to the sound of a lone tribal drum. Leading the group was Richard Whiteley, a Harvard business school-educated best-selling author and management consultant who moonlights as an urban shaman. `Envision an entrance into the earth, a well, or a swimming hole', Whiteley half-whispered above the sea of heaving chests. He then instructed the executives how to retrieve from their inner depths their `power animals, who would guide their companies to 21st century success'."

A third of British CEOs of FTSE 100 companies used such personal coaches in 2007. The debt crisis was built on runaway positive thinking. As Ehrenreich notes, "the recklessness of the borrowers was far exceeded by that of the lenders, with some finance companies involved in subprimes undertaking debt-to-asset ratios of 30 to 1."

The promoter of a master's programme in `positive psychology' at the University of East London saw `healthy British scepticism' as one of the `challenges' facing her. But we need to be sceptical, to see things as they are, not as we wish them to be. We need not `positive thinking' but real thinking.
11 comment| 10 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
VINE VOICEon 18 March 2012
Positive thinking has become so integrated into the value system of our modern culture, it might seem somewhat odd to find an argument against it. And yet that is exactly what Barbara Ehrenreich does. The release of this book, which was published as "Smile or Die" in the UK has corresponded with the publication of more bold books, willing to challenge the power of positive thinking. A little while back I read Steve Salerno's unrelenting attack on the self-help movement, "SHAM: How the Self-Help Movement Made America Helpless" and since then we have had "The Art of Failure: The Anti-Self Help Book" by Neel Burton. Even the great psychologist Richard Wiseman has taken positive thinking to task and looked at the real science behind self-help in "59 Seconds", which came out the same year as "Bright-Sided". This book was not an overt criticism of the self-help movement but rather a genuine attempt to use case studies, raw data and proven psychological methods to help people improve their lives. However, in keeping to the science Wiseman highlighted just how much of the self-help movement was bogus and even damaging. His first chapter, "Happiness", began with a total debunking of positive thinking and revealed that far from being innocuous at worse, these techniques endorsed by the vast majority of the self-help movement could actually be harmful.

However, out of all these books Ehrenreich's "Bright-Sided" seems to be the most comprehensive and distilled in its deconstruction of the whole philosophy of positive thinking. She begins with her first clash with the cult of positive thinking after being diagnosed with breast cancer in around 2001. Ehrereich's award winning "Welcome to Cancerland" article, which was published not long after she started receiving treatment, demonstrated the writer's annoyance with the whole positive industry surrounding victims of cancer. The article inspired several people to question the so-called empowering methods being employed at all levels of cancer care and support. It even inspired the 2011 documentary "Pink Ribbon Inc.", which further explored the exploitative industry of those who were supposedly trying to help victims of the disease.
In "Bright-Sided" she has far more space to go through her own personal experiences on forums and support groups, which led her down the path of investigating the whole nature of positive thinking. Ehrenreich noticed that not only were pseudoscientific products and ideas being hawked to help strengthen a patient's immune systems against cancer on the back of positive thinking, but also that positive thinking was putting extra pressure on some victims of the disease. Worse still, terminal cancer patients were being made to feel they had somehow failed. Ehernreich noted the perverse extremes the philosophy of cancer support gurus who told "survivors" to be thankful for their cancer. Working through restriction and seeing opportunities through bad situations is all well and good, but that is a world apart from thinking that being affected by a disease like cancer is somehow a blessing!

America, as the author, notes in her prologue, is a country known for its positive attitude. The sign-off "Have a nice day!" and perpetual ivory white smiles are the trademark of the nation. Whereas Britain had the stereotyped stiff upper lip in the face of adversity, their cousins over the Atlantic did much more than stare down their problems with calm and a dry sense of humour, they "embraced it" with open arms.

Looking outside "Cancerland" Ehrenreich's attention was drawn to the way positive thinking had become a part of the very society lived in and had gone on to infect the rest of the world. I was particularly interested in the way traced this national philosophy back to the USA's Christian roots. Positive thinking has a distinctively puritanical hard work ethic at its core, which the author linked back to Calvinism. She then traces how it evolved through the emergence of American religion such as Christian Science and the 19th century mystical idea that people could be healed through thinking in a certain way.

Ever the anti-capitalist, it would have been out of character for the author not to have picked up on the way materialism became part of the whole positive thinking fad as it took hold of America's value system. Suddenly doctrines in Christianity that saw the virtue in poverty and humility were replaced by the idea that God wants Man to prosper. To be a successful and wealthy businessman went hand-in-hand with being a good Christian. Positive thinking, Ehrenreich argues fuelled the mega-churches and the rise of evangelism. The obvious attraction of enthusiastic and happy people - genuine and otherwise - meant that such institutions would be successful.

Of course, American Christianity, as powerful and hugely influential as it is, does not have a monopoly on positive thinking as a method or ethic. The book makes a strong point that the allure of the attitude easily permeated the New Age movement from its earliest beginnings. Deepak Chopra and others fully endorse the mind over matter ideas that first became popular in 19th century America. This has allowed the gateway to open for all sorts of spiritual marriages with the acquisition of wealth. Concepts like cosmic ordering and the law of attraction, championed by the bestselling pseudoscientific book "The Secret" by Rhonda Byrne, straddles New Age spiritualism and secularism with ease.

It is with the idea that positive thinking is just a given to be good for you, Ehrenreich makes the case that its misuse is responsible for the fall of businesses and a strong component in the Subprime Mortgage Crisis and global recession of the late 2000s. She has a good argument that compliments the cognitive dissonance/self-justification theory illustrated in Carol Tavris's "Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me)". Looking at it both we see an interesting picture of self-justification and refusal to accept personal error or responsibility fueled by a culture of "yes men". The "yes men" element, of course, comes from Ehrenreich. Many large corporations have adopted a policy of firing advisers who were not positive enough. This type of delusion led employees of banks and businesses to refuse to listen to those who erred on the side of caution or presented a picture that was anything less than positive for the future.

What seems to key in Ehrenreich's critique is the way that overzealous positivity prohibits the voices of reason. To not be positive has become a sin. And yet this has not always been so. There are plenty of fables that praise the person who is willing to stand against madness, delusion and flattery to deliver the hard truth. My favourite is Cordelia from Shakespeare's "King Lear". The youngest of the abdicating old king's daughters refuses to follow the flattery of her sisters, Goneril and Regan. They have competed for their father's affection in public in order to be given the biggest portion of the kingdom as possible. They play to his vanity. Cordelia, Lear's actual favourite, will not do anything but tell her father the truth. Lear ends up banishing her and suffers the consequences when his elder daughters reveal the true, cruel and ruthless natures. Cordelia, it is argued by many is also replaced The Fool, Lear's court jester, who continues to remind the king of his follies and his errors of judgment. The truth is that every great leader needs their Cordelia. They need the person who has the strength and cares enough to tell the truth.

The audiobook production is straightforward and slick. There are no whistles and bells, as befits the tone of the book. My only criticism is that Barbara Ehrenreich might not be to everyone's taste. I get her dry humour and delivery, but a fellow listener commented that it sounded a little robotic. This is a problem with a lot of members of the sceptical movement. They might be witty and articulate, but that cold logic they bring to their subjects can permeate into their delivery, making them less appealing to the middle ground. It is a small observation and I reiterate that it didn't spoil my enjoyment of the work.

"Bright-Sided" is a sobering and bold piece of non-fiction. I believe it opened the floodgates for more works that have dared to challenge impractical, exploitative and delusional concepts at the very core of modern society. This is coming from someone who counts life-coaches and self-help counselors among his friends. I even wrote a forward for a delightful collection of motivating essays written by a dear friend who is an incredible positive thinker. I don't think that we should be deeply cynical about those who motivate us or tell us to think positively and neither does Ehrenreich. We may have some interesting arguments for applied pessimism in recent non-fiction books and perhaps nihilism will make a return to the fore in the wake the damage over-the-top optimism and unrealistic idealism has done to the financial factor. However, Ehrenreich is not putting the case for an opposite approach to positive thinking. Her final chapter, her postscript in fact, is perhaps the best piece in the entire book. Unlike Salerno's "SHAM", Ehrenreich acknowledges that the reader needs some sort of alternative solution to unrealistic and unchecked positive thinking. She looks at the way pessimism can be applied practically without destroying ambition and how science enables us to best understand the way the world works. She argues for a sense of proportion, balance and realism.
0Comment| 7 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 3 January 2010
I'm an American married to a Brit: I'm always complaining about the pessimism of the Brit. Now my husband's getting back at me:) Can highly recommend the book!
0Comment| 8 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 13 March 2012
I found the book amusing, insightful and to have a excellent dry wit throughout. The reviewer criticizing the book as boring and long I think was looking for a different genre. Her very thoughtful critique of positive psychology in general and Martin Seligman's blustering defence of his unscientific approach in particular were especially refreshing.
0Comment| One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 14 July 2013
I am unfortunately well versed in self help. I am also a rare being these days being someone who is genuinely unprivileged yet not trapped in a ghetto. The positive thinking movement has been used to bully, isolate and justify many cruelties to me and other so it was surprisingly uplifting to be affirmed by a logical and well thought out person/book. The problem with positive thinking is that cruelty that is enacted on others is also turned inward when the life does what it will and change for the worse at some point.

This cruel solipsistic social engineering needs to be countered with honest accepting and truthful information.

Get a grip with the power of negative thinking.

Incidentally my negative life has saved others and given countless people happiness and personal courage. Positive thinking has lead to the downfall of economies greater inequality and pervasive magical thinking that will undermine healing in medical and psychological practices. I am better person and the lives around me are better with me being a depressive curmudgeon and you could be that too.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 10 May 2016
Ehrenrich dismisses positive psychology by confusing realistic optimism with faking positive emotion. Fortunately, since the time of writing (and even before, many times over) everything she has written has been debunked.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 16 May 2012
One in the eye for the happy-clappy brigade. But is it necessary to take them quite this seriously? Don't worry, Barbara, be happy.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 11 October 2010
Very disappointing read. Although the title was interesting and the subject original, this book comes across as very badly researched and very one sided. The author fails in the first instance to really define what she sees as positive psychology and then appears to go on a one person crusade against those whom offend her. As a journalist one would have expected better research and better presented arguments. Not worth reading, in my view
0Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse