Essay Comparing Gladwell's 'David And Goliath'
The book David and Goliath by Malcolm Gladwell follows in the footsteps of his other famous works The Tipping Point, Blink, and Outliers. Gladwell’s books seek to show readers a new perspective on the world, where they can be insightful and take advantage of any situation. However, unlike Gladwell’s previous works, David and Goliath fails to deliver its point. Gladwell’s message of overcoming seemingly unfavorable odds is clouded by poor creativity, a lack of ethos, and awkward pace. Many people think David and Goliath is informative since it discusses commonalities not often recognized—that’s incorrect. Instead of proposing new mindsets to readers, Gladwell rewords lessons to sound like analogies for the battle between David and Goliath. Most readers will likely have heard the lessons being told before, just not in the context that Gladwell provides. Gladwell asserts that remote misses and difficult childhoods are beneficial, but Joe Nocera of the New York Times counters, “But isn't that like saying, ‘Whatever doesn't kill us makes us stronger’? Some people overcome difficulties. Others don't. Gladwell can't really say why Dr. Freireich is in the former category and not the latter.” The way Gladwell delivers his point to the reader appears to be reasonable and enlightening, but
…show more content…
By the end of the book, readers are left with learning about a few interesting stories and the backgrounds of famous individuals, but there is no greater meaning to be found; Gladwell attempts to place meaning where there is none. Writing off new lessons due to changing the words of the phrases, using flawed evidence to back up already weak arguments, and pacing that changes abruptly throughout the book culminate into a book that fulfills no purpose—Gladwell’s book is uninformative and not worth
By the end of the book, readers are left with learning about a few interesting stories and the backgrounds of famous individuals, but there is no greater meaning to be found; Gladwell attempts to place meaning where there is none. Writing off new lessons due to changing the words of the phrases, using flawed evidence to back up already weak arguments, and pacing that changes abruptly throughout the book culminate into a book that fulfills no purpose—Gladwell’s book is uninformative and not worth