Inarticulate Society: Eloquence and Culture in America

Toward the end of THE INARTICULATE SOCIETY, Schactman crystallizes America's discomfort with well-spoken individuals in a chilling insight: our TV and movie villains have become more articulate than the heroes. Full of pungent comments like this that underline how anti-intellectualism has been promoted through the principle of the LCD (lowest common denominator) -- the conception of the American people as having the intelligence of the average fourth grader (a marketing strategy adopted by advertisers so as to appeal to the widest possible audience), Schactman shows how this conception has flooded into every facet of our public discourse. Suggesting that those whom we have elected as our representatives have concomitantly engaged in the systematic stupidification of our political language upon the advice of highly paid communications consultants trained in the advertising, marketing and public relations industries, and in the process have sown the seeds of a disinterested, passive citizenry, Schactman, after his dead-on diagnosis, makes a series of proposals intended to resurrect democracy through the renovation of our once proud heritage of political discourse. In the course of his discussion, Schactman relates how the classic liberal society was founded upon the belief that all (male, property-owning) members of society must be engaged in the public discourse, and the corrollary that in order to be able to do so, individuals must be able to discuss complex issues articulately and persuasively. Here is his succint summation of the rise of liberal individualism and its implications: "Empowering individuals regardless of class began with the revolution of Martin Luther and the Enlightenment, and found political expression in the populism of President Andrew Jackson and the 1848 nationalistic upheavals in Europe. In the latter half of the nineteenth century, from Karl Marx's theoretical bifurcation of the population into the exploiters and the exploited arose attempts to form the exploited masses of a particular country or region into coherent groups that could agitate for change in their political and economic status. Where the residue if feudalism held sway, nationalism also began to provide a rationale for the old feudal constituencies to cohere of the purposes of organizing themselves in nonfeudal aggregates. Leaders whose abilities lay in mobilizing these masses came to the fore and pushed out those old-style leaders who had previously made their way up political ladders to positions of ascendancy and who saw their task only as influencing the elites." Pg. 96.He goes on to discuss how the Marxian analysis has been refocused in the face of the proliferation of various forms of media: "Jurgen Habermas insists that the center of argument about the modern world has now shifted from Marxism contentions about how industrial production is organized to an examination of how commination in societies is organized and effected. That contention is

When I saw that this book has not been reviewed, I was shocked. So, even though I have not read the book in about a year, I will give it one.Many books approach the nature of the problems within the media or public education as something which is apocalyptic. That may not be all that bad since it creates some sort of artificial tension that makes for more interesting reading. Tom Shactman does the same. However, unlike Sykes and other writers who tend to be dramatic, Shactman does spread out blame in a real sense. There isn't even the stench of an ad-hominem. What's more, the blame is really centered on a process, not on agencies or any sort of ideology. This makes for an clear thesis that exhibited exceptional follow-through in rhetoric and evidence.What is the thesis? Well, I can't remember exactly what he wrote, but the gist of it was that we as a society has been losing the ability to discern and convey wisdom. Not raw data, precisely, but useful, contextual, nuggets of information. This inability to connect by conversations can, and he documents the results, lead to serious problems like decreased conflict resolution, poor education, and media manipulation among others.He ends up describing a couple of remedies that do have some hope of solving some of these problems.If you are researching pedagogy or media studies, or just plain interested in communications, this is a book that I cannot recommend highly enough.