| Product: |
No Logo - Naomi Klein |
| Date: |
08/07/01 (144 review reads) |
| Rating: |
 |
Advantages: Clear, evocative, and effective.
Disadvantages: A little clinical, but necessary
A popular read on the Tube, and a mainstay of book charts, I had to pick this book up and see what it was all about, especially after reading that it was an anti-capitalist manifesto! Not to support to cause, but more in the nature of understanding the beast.
I was pleasantly surprised to find a well written, well thought out, and while not impartial, fair rendition of the current state of corporate operation in our so-called 'global' society.
Klein explains the background of the brands which we all know, and have had drummed into us. She explains the rationale behind their creation, and the actions that they take, and what drives them to these pursuits. She goes on to explain the trends corporations have adopted; the removal of their concrete assets, replaced by contractors and temps as oppossed to actual employees and factories.
Her point regarding contracted out work to the Third World, and the problems that creates there are a fundamental point in the book, but not specifically original. The good thing is that she creates a good synopsis of what is happening, and introduces the problems to newcomers. Her exploration of labour issues in the First World were, however, new to me, often missed out by the media when reporting on the current anti-corporate riots. I found the trends towards avoiding full time wages, health care, and complete disrespect for the notion of employer/employee mutual loyalty interesting, and perhaps one of the mainstays of the book for me personally.
Her style is clear, concise, very journalistic in that there is a veneer of impartiality, but the aim of the work is clearly outlined. Facts are given, conclusions drawn, but no vitriolic attacks on the brands and corporations she writes about.
All in all a very good read, interesting and insightful. You no longer perceive all anticapitalists as thugs, or imbeciles, incapable of understanding the issues. They do have a point, and here it is c
learly and effectively portrayed. A very good contribution to the debate.
Summary:
|
|
