Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I ordered this book from Amazon because I'd heard a rave review about it. I think it was on NPR. So, I thought I might learn something of Appalachian culture, about which I knew nothing except what I saw in Deliverance. I didn't know what an elegy was, but I thought I'd know by the time I finished. But when I turned the last page, I still didn't know. So I looked it up. I found it defined as "a poem of serious reflection, typically a lament for the dead." I didn't find Hillbilly Elegy to be just that, exactly. Hillbilly culture, or variations on the theme, run through our American culture, and aren't confined to a geographical location. Just go to any Walmart. Rather, I found it to be an autobiography of a man who really didn't grow up in Appalachia, but was profoundly influenced by its toxic culture, and who beat the odds against him. Mr. Vance is obviously very proud of himself. And he should be. But this is not an elegy. I think the purpose of this book is an exercise is ego definition. And I'm not saying that is bad or wrong. People can't live without a representation of self to self. Otherwise, we wouldn't function in this world. But Mr. Vance's struggle with ego is a leitmotif that runs through the entire book. And that's fine too. What I take issue with is the way he does it. He tries the opposite tack of Postmodernism: he tries to be objective. And for an autobiography, I don't think this is appropriate. Mr. Vance likes to cite sociological and demographic statistics to back up his personal narrative. But, why? Isn't one's subjective experience enough? This work will never be considered anything more than anecdotal, so why try? This is not the sort of personal narrative one finds in something like Knausgaard's "My Struggle," which, fiction or not, makes you feel like you've known the man all your life and could sit down and have a beer with him without feeling the least bit awkward. On the contrary, Vance's yarn is presented in something like the third person, a stance I don't understand. As a result, the prose is dry and choppy. I found myself slogging through just to get through. As an effort at self-awareness in the Socratic tradition (Know thyself), I'd give this work a D. One never feels like the author is revealing himself, at least not with the brutal honesty of Knausgaard. Instead, it reads like a Hallmark card of correct sentimentality. This is not an age of political correctness: it's an age of sentimental correctness; and, Vance assures us with Hallmark card certainty that his sentiments are correct. He adores his sister and Mamaw and Papaw. He's a devout family man with the best of intentions. He goes to church and believes in Jesus. He's a conservative who doubts the ability of government to make effective change. Fine and dandy. But I wouldn't want to sit next to this guy on an airplane. I think the conversation would always get steered to himself. He finished Ohio State in two years, with honors. And then went to Yale and became editor of the "prestigious" Yale Law Review. And to ice the cake, he served as a Marine in Iraq. I mean, this dude's a physical and mental mensch. Man is the measure of all things, said Protagoras. And Vance is the measure of all men. I think Mr. Vance might be posturing himself for a shot at political office. Anyway, read it if you like. But this ain't no Steinbeck.