Sign in with Facebook
Richard Butchins's Reviews > Revolution
Revolution
by
by
Oh dear, the bewildered, Beverly Hills buddhist, is back. I have a confession to make. I didn't finish this book, it became so irritating I gave up about chapter ten. This is the book equivalent of listening to the guy at the end of the bar who's taken far too much cocaine and insists on telling you, in a loud voice, he has the solution to the world's problems. It all sounds great to him at the time but is, on reflection, the mutterings of, and I quote Brand himself. " an out of touch lunatic writing from cloud cuckoo land".
I like the fact that Brand has the platform to ramble, as long as he's funny. This book isn't funny, it's too didactic to be funny. I am not going to wade into the swamp of political populism that Brand inhabits, suffice to say that it's a bog and sticky and it ain't going nowhere. The fact that Brand used Johann Hari as a researcher is puzzling. Hari was stripped of his 2008 Orwell Journalism prize in 2011 after having to admit multiple charges of plagiarism and making malicious edits to several of his critics Wikipedia pages. Hardly the fount of veracity required to give Brand's book substance.
And that's it, the book lacks substance and the writing is piss poor. A bizzare combination of chatty "alright geezer" conversational style mixed with an alarming use of too many adjectives. It's like someone stuffed a thesaurus up Brands ass and he can't stop shitting words.
It's good for Brand's brand, no doubt, but it's really only a book for Brand fans, he's unlikely to win any converts with this, then again I don't think that was the purpose of this publication. However, if you insist on having it, then at least steal a copy. Brand should approve of that…
I like the fact that Brand has the platform to ramble, as long as he's funny. This book isn't funny, it's too didactic to be funny. I am not going to wade into the swamp of political populism that Brand inhabits, suffice to say that it's a bog and sticky and it ain't going nowhere. The fact that Brand used Johann Hari as a researcher is puzzling. Hari was stripped of his 2008 Orwell Journalism prize in 2011 after having to admit multiple charges of plagiarism and making malicious edits to several of his critics Wikipedia pages. Hardly the fount of veracity required to give Brand's book substance.
And that's it, the book lacks substance and the writing is piss poor. A bizzare combination of chatty "alright geezer" conversational style mixed with an alarming use of too many adjectives. It's like someone stuffed a thesaurus up Brands ass and he can't stop shitting words.
It's good for Brand's brand, no doubt, but it's really only a book for Brand fans, he's unlikely to win any converts with this, then again I don't think that was the purpose of this publication. However, if you insist on having it, then at least steal a copy. Brand should approve of that…
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Revolution.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
November 3, 2014
–
Started Reading
November 3, 2014
– Shelved
November 4, 2014
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-25 of 25 (25 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Chris
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Nov 25, 2014 04:27AM
what part was lunacy specifically?
reply
|
flag
That's Brand's comment not mine - he says it in the intro - in regard to not wanting to sound like one....In my opinion he fails.
all seemed pretty straightforward to me, some very practical ideas for changes and pointing out some of the more egregiously destructive parts of capitalism
just your review was pretty vicious and personal but its not really a book about Brand its about big world issues so what was crazy about what he wrote about the world?
What he wrote about the world was not necessarily crazy but his methodology and literary technique are risible. Pointing out that Capitalism is destructive is like pointing out that fire is hot. My review is, of course, only my opinion and as such does not count for much.
Russell Brand is giving all of the proceeds from "Revolution" away, to what he does not necessarily consider charity, because he loathes charity. He will give it away in a way that empowers the people he gives it to, according to him:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peo...
"He is promoting his latest book, entitled Revolution, out on 23 October, of which proceeds "will go to creating social enterprises that are not for profit" and that "represent an alternative to some of the systems that we currently labour under".
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/20... "He received a six-figure advance for Revolution, but insists he won’t be keeping it. “I’m going to get a property in east London and set up a coffee and juice bar to be run by people in recovery from addiction.” So he’s going to give away his money? “No. I’m no longer interested in making money. And the money I get, I’m going to use for good. We need systemic change, not charity. I won’t be in charge. They’ll vote for how they want to run it.”
I think you are right about a lot of celebrities, but I think you are wrong about Russell Brand.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/russell...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peo...
"He is promoting his latest book, entitled Revolution, out on 23 October, of which proceeds "will go to creating social enterprises that are not for profit" and that "represent an alternative to some of the systems that we currently labour under".
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/20... "He received a six-figure advance for Revolution, but insists he won’t be keeping it. “I’m going to get a property in east London and set up a coffee and juice bar to be run by people in recovery from addiction.” So he’s going to give away his money? “No. I’m no longer interested in making money. And the money I get, I’m going to use for good. We need systemic change, not charity. I won’t be in charge. They’ll vote for how they want to run it.”
I think you are right about a lot of celebrities, but I think you are wrong about Russell Brand.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/russell...
That is a fair comment - I'd argue about the definition of "profits". I don't doubt his good intentions but then, the road to hell is paved with them..Buying a property in East London and opening a juice bar is a rather obtuse way of alleviating poverty , as well as a canny investment...:-)
Ayn Rand.... property rights .... tax payers keeping the money changers in business. I'm not religious but agree Jesus threw out the money lenders. We know greed unconsciously.
I haven't even read the book so I can't judge it, but you can't just judge a book you haven't read
I've read this review, and it's all about how much you deslike Russel Brand, and nothing about the actual book...You're an attention seeking idiot.
Anir wrote: "I've read this review, and it's all about how much you deslike Russel Brand, and nothing about the actual book...You're an attention seeking idiot."
Your comment is inaccurate in all respects. I have no feelings about Mr Brand on a personal level and I am many things but an idiot is not one of them. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, however anodyne and foolish it maybe. I would ask you not to insult me or anyone else for holding a different opinion to yourself.
Your rewiev reminds me of Russel's own style of writing. He'd probably agree with you on most of your point. I don't however, and found the audiobook to be well structured, informative and funny. Although I can see how his stream of consciousness like narrative would be disruptive if reading instead of listening to the book.
He's good when he's talking - cos that's his job - writing, however is not his forte !
*sigh*Sorry for what I said before Richard.
I have been in a very, very stressful period, and kind of...well, I was an asshole. And not only to you.
I'm usually quite the polite guy, but I just lose my shit at people lately.
I apologize.
I'll understand if you just ignore this, but I'd be relieved if you accept my apology.
yours truly, a rude idiot.
I happily accept your apology.
I would not listen to a word that guy says-- and sure as well would not read his book,, I not a fan what so ever
I think the best way to approach this book is that it's messy and inconclusive but that this is unavoidable given the subject. It's too sprawling not to at times annoy just about anyone who isn't a Brand fan. But it is the only book I've ever encountered that has tackled oppositionism from all the main angles as one grand project. I must admit that in spite of myself, finding his spiritualism irritating, I was inspired by the book. It's a call to arms and even if you frequently disagree, those disagreements are more forward moving than static. Remember, an open mind frequently disagrees, it only doesn't dismiss. If you can get past the bowery poetry club Spoken Word style I think the book is basically the fastest way to engage with a set of subjects, public and personal, begging for action but getting mostly resignation.
Plankuton, your apology gives me hope for the world! Even several years after you made it. :-)
Spot on review! I'm only on page 40 and my eyes are literally aching from the amount of eye rolls this book induces.
Lucy wrote: "Spot on review! I'm only on page 40 and my eyes are literally aching from the amount of eye rolls this book induces."Ta :-)
Yes Brand impresses me, from an uninformed distance, as garbled. The Hari reference interested me. I’ve been reading his book Lost Connections and initially thought it good but then small ‘tells’, as they say in poker, began to arrive, an exaggeration here, a passé fact represented as revolutionary new insight there, everyone he interviews being the leader in their field, it began to seem self promoting and a memory of Frey’s fraudulent book A Million Little Pieces’ popped into my head. I typed in Is Hari a fraud and there it is. And yet all these famous people have this book as a game changer - and it’s not all bad, he has put in some legwork.
I'd agree with what you say except to inaccurately quote Oscar Wilde "your work is both good and original, except the good parts aren't original and the original parts aren't good" This applies to Brands book in spades. He doesn't tackle the issues well, not that the issues aren't important or need discussing, just that he is not the man to do it.
We found the proud capitalist!
