Download The Road To Character Edited By David Brooks Audio Books

book is basically a collection of essays about people from the past whom he admires, It's basically how the 'virtuous' lived in The Good Ole Days, He extols "eulogy traits" over "resume traits" but each of these people has quite the resume, If the presidency is on your resume, you don't even need a resume anymore,

He writes about various people and their lives in a moreorless biographical fashion from birth to death, which is quite repetitive, He also bends over backwards to make their lives fit his thesis, They all have interesting lives and much to learn from, but there's no need for Brooks to dumb it down, or simplify it, or view their different lives in the view of a single theme.


Here are some of his main ideas some

of which are more inspiring than others
Everybody is naturally bad and needs to undergo hard work in order to become virtuous.

Repress yourself in order to be good,
You are part of society, Don't deviate too much from that or assert your individuality too much, That's hubris.

As a student of Chinese, I find Brooks very Confucian, but this is just a collection of Western writers and ideas, It would be forgivable if this was meant to be a collection of True American Heroes, but these books always end up being very Eurocentric.
To be fair, China is mentioned in one paragraph of the book as Gen Marshall had a brief but failed stint ins China, Confucius was a traditionalist who thought the ancient sages carried the truth of society and humanity, The individual was flawed and needed extensive education and training to become more like the sages, Follow the 'uprightness' of the former times instead of the Daoist idea of embracing your nature, He woulda loved Confucius, but the East is too different from his idealized Western paradise,

There is abundant wealth in the great stories of history, but the past does not have a monopoly on wisdom or virtue, History has a tendency to remember the best actors while we exaggerate the influence of mediocrity in our era, When you compare the Kardashians to St Augustine, Augustine is going to win,
Quick take on David Brooks' Road to Character: sort of sad we live in a society that needs this book, But we need this book, The real trick Getting those who need to read it to want to read it,

Watch for my review in The Hedgehog , I spotted David Brooks' latest nonfiction book, The Road to Character, while I was browsing new books available on NetGalley, It looked like something that I might enjoy and perhaps even find to be inspirational, Thank you to Random House for sending me an advanced copy in exchange for an honest review,

PLOT In The Road to Character, New York Times Columnist David Brooks profiles a range of people spanning several eras that he considers to have a strong sense of character.
These are mostly very flawed people, who experienced a bumpy road on their way to developing admirable characteristics, Brooks examines how society's definition of morals and strong character has shifted dramatically over generations, He ends his book with a look at our current society and how technology has shaped our idea of self and character,

LIKE I was most drawn to Brooks observations of current trends, which comprises a small portion of The Road to Character, I found a few of his character profiles to be fascinating, especially Francis Perkins, an middleclass woman who fought for worker's rights, Brooks sprinkles his book with interesting information involving well known historical figures and ordinary citizens, who are made extraordinary through their depth of character, I enjoyed these glimpses and tidbits,

DISLIKE The Road to Character was a chore to read, I had to bribe myself to finish it, . . "Ten more pages and you can make a latte or read something else, " The pacing was sluggish. Although Brooks picked some great lives to profile, I'm not sure that I always agreed with his idea of "character", There was a "not so subtle" undercurrent of religion and faith as being a huge factor in character, yet he backpedals at the end of the book, with a mention of religion not being a prerequisite for good character.
I agree that religion isn't a must, yet his examples pushed the idea of religion,

Although interesting, I found a majority of the lives that he profiled to be archaic, with lives and values being so vastly different from modern times, that the comparisons rang hallow.
I liked how he showed shifts throughout the eras, but I wish that the primary focus had been modern and thus, have current relevance, I anticipated that this book would leave me with thoughts on how to change my own life and shape my own character in modern times, but it didn't.
It was a disappointment.

RECOMMEND No. The Road to Character was a dull read and not as relevant or thought provoking as it should have been,

Like my review Check out my blog! David Brooks doesn't profess to always follow the road to character, but he wanted to know what it looked like.
Thus, his motivation for studying people throughout history who made an effort to build their character and follow a moral code of conduct that wouldn't change based on circumstance, their desires, or the fashion of the day.


The book starts with an eloquent introduction, Brooks outlines his thesis that humans have an internal struggle between "Adam" the purest, moral self and "Adam"a more hedonistic, selfish self/ as long as you're not doing anything obviously bad, you're doing just fine.
He also describes a current culture that has made it harder to be "good", Listening to the audio version of this book I found myself furiously scribbling notes, wanting to capture everything in the introduction as it seemed so relevant.


Each of the people Brooks highlights in his book as examples of taking the road to character are flawed, as we all are at one point while listening my husband turned to me and said "Is this a book about people with good character or bad character!" This is where the book really loses momentum.
Instead of being inspired by their stories, I really found the book to just drag through most of these profiles, They really could have benefited from some significant editing,

The final chapter of the book provides a nice closing, weaving together the themes from the profiles, Along with the introduction, this is where Brooks shines, رزومه یا شخصیت کدامیک تعیین کننده هست
خلاصه این کتاب را در پادکست "بی پلاس" گوش دادم
دیوید بروکس در کتاب جادۀ شخصیت با مقایسه قرن پیش و قرن حاضر می خواهد بگوید هر انسانی یک سری ارزشها دارد که میروند توی رزومه کاری و یک سری ارزشها دارد که وقتی مرد در مجلس ختمش ذکر میکنند. بعد میگوید که در جهان مدرن ما این دو چندان همخوانی ندارند. دنیا ما را هل میدهد به سمت ارزشهایی که به درد رزومه کاری بخورند و ما هم آن روزهای جوانی با دنیا همراهیم. بالاخره آدم میخواهد کار خوبی داشته باشد و مهارت کسب کند و در رشته خودش اسمی در کند. بعد که این جاده کمی هموارتر شد صدای درون آدمیزاد در میآید که پس ارزشهای دیگر چی آنها که شخصیت آدم را میسازند چه میشوند و انسان راه میافتد به دنبال آن ارزشها. آقای بروکس اسم این دو را میگذارد آدم یک و آدم دو. آدم یک از تواناییهایش استفاده میکند تا هر روز در کار و درآمد و امور مادی بهتر شود و آدم دو به ضعفهایش فکر میکند و بهتر کردن آنها و توی این فکر کردن به ضعفها و ریشههایشان شخصیت معنویش را میسازد.

از جمله آثار مشهور و موفق بروکس "حیوان اجتماعی" است که در آن با محوریت بخشیدن به تنهایی انسان و میل او به تعلق داشتن به کاوش در سرچشمههای عشق احساس و شخصیتی قدرتمند در زندگی انسان معاصر میپردازد.
جوهره و فلسفه بنیادین جاده شخصیت دعوت خواننده به عنوان عضوی از جامعه بشری به تجدید نظر در نگاهی است که به خویشتن دارد. بروکس ما را به نگاهی دوباره به سویه فراموششدهمان فرا میخواند. او در این راه فروتنی را صفتی کلیدی میداند و این نه صرفا به معنی فروتنی پیشهکردن در برابر دیگر مردمان که به معنی پذیرش درونی ضعفها کاستیها و نقصانهایی است که بخشی ناگزیر از ذات آدمی محسوب میشوند. هر انسانی برای رسیدن به شخصیتی قدرتمند و تزلزلناپذیر نیاز دارد که این ضعفها را به رسمیت بشناسد و سپس به مواجهه با آنها برخیزد.

پ. ن.
تن آدمی شریف است به جان آدمیت / نه همین لباس زیباست نشان آدمیت
سعدی
حرف چه بود تا تو اندیشی از آن/ حرف چه بود خار دیوار رزان
حرف و صوت و گفت را بر هم زنم/ تا که بی این هر سه با تو دم زنم
مولوی
sitelink com/archives/the A painfully preachy and disappointing book, particularly from an author who was in the process of leaving his wife ofyears and beginning a relationship with his research assistant, who isyears younger than he is.
That could be overlooked if the book weren't extremely rambling and filled with examples of horribly flawed people whose flaws Brooks seems to entirely overlook when it's convenient for his point whatever that might have been, or concentrate on when he thinks it makes his point.


In my small book club, none of us actually finished the book in time for the discussion, as we all found it quite unpleasant to read.
I decided I'd eventually finish it since I was already arounddone, but it took more than a month and a half to get back to it because I just plain did not want to read it.


I almost gave it two, as a few of the people he discussed were interesting and I'd like to learn more about them, but decided against it, as that's not actually about this book, and I'm not even confident that I have a good understanding of what the people were really like since Brooks seems to only cover aspects of their lives he thinks support his story.
Near the beginning of the book, Brooks declares: “I was born with a natural disposition toward shallowness, Im paid to be a narcissistic blowhard, to volley my opinions, to appear smarter than I really am, to appear better and more authoritative than I really am.
I have to work harder than most people to avoid a life of smug superficiality, Ive also become more aware that, like many people these days, I have lived a life of vague moral aspiration vaguely wanting to be good, vaguely wanting to serve some larger purpose, while lacking a concrete moral vocabulary, a clear understanding of how to live a rich inner life, or even a clear knowledge of how character is developed ” An interesting opening gambit.
Before he begins his biographical sketches, Brooks notes: “But we are morally inarticulate, Were not more selfish or venal than people in other times, but weve lost the understanding of how character is built, The “crooked timber” moral tradition based on the awareness of sin and the confrontation with sin was an inheritance passed down from generation to generation.
” Okay, this, then is a book set in the Western JudeoChristian worldview and that is Brooks lens,

There are parts of this book that I really enjoyed, The biographical sketches are superb, He begins with Frances Perkins and the tragic Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire and the impact that had on Perkins, He then skillfully weaves in the values with which Perkins was raised, The section on Dorothy Day, who was a promiscuous drunk when she was younger, is utterly fascinating, Brooks extrapolates from Days life to declare that “In the first place, they people like Day just show up, They provide a ministry of presence, Next, they dont compare. The sensitive person understands that each persons ordeal is unique and should not be compared to anyone elses, Next, they do the practical things making lunch, dusting the room, washing the towels, Finally, they dont try to minimize what is going on, They dont attempt to reassure with false, saccharine sentiments, They dont say that the pain is all for the best, They dont search for silver linings, They do what wise souls do in the presence of tragedy and trauma, They practice a passive activism, They dont bustle about trying to solve something that cannot be solved, The sensitive person grants the sufferer the dignity of her own process, She lets the sufferer define the meaning of what is going on, She just sits simply through the nights of pain and darkness, being practical, human, simple, and direct, " This was, for me, the high point of the book, The sections on Marshall and Ike are also good, but lack the depth and power of the section on Day,

The book starts to go downhill and probably reaches its low point in the section on Samuel Johnson, He brings in Montaigne for purposes of comparison of a rough contemporary to Johnson, I almost quit reading when Brooks found it necessary to include Montaignes reflections on his own ah, genitalia, “Which intrudes so tiresomely when we do not require it and fails us so annoyingly when we need it most.
” Quite frankly after briefly wondering if Brooks wasnt a bit of a , well you can fill in the blank, I thought, this writer desperately needs an editor.


The conclusion of the book, where you might expect Brooks to pull it all together was for me disappointing, Brooks notes that if you “have lived through the last sixty or seventy years, you are the product of a more competitive meritocracy” ah, I have and I do not feel meritocratic because I have not lived my life “trying to make something of” myself nor have I ever been overly motivated by success.
I have not seen myself as a vessel of human capital” talent to be cultivated efficiently and prudently, Brooks goes on to talk about children being “praised to an unprecedented degree” and “honed to an unprecedented degree, ” He writes as if this is a universal condition, It is not. It may be somewhat true among the wealthier, but it is not a universal phenomenon,

In sum, Brooks is at his best as a biographer, He is at his weakest as a social commentator, He is limited by his lens which is that of a Judeo Christian background and a relatively comfortable and what appears to be a somewhat insulated life.
.