Comments on: Nickel and Dimed at UNC

By: Tagore Smith

Tagore Smith — Sat, 30 Aug 2003 06:24:57 +0000

I read this a little while back, but I don’t have a copy at hand. I don’t remember it being particularly anti-christian, for a book written by an atheist- the one big point on which Ehrnereich agree. The book is tripe though. Ehrenreich has no idea how to be poor, and no interest in learning. The people around her could have told her a few things about getting by, had she recognized that they possessed skills she lacked. That would have required that she acknowledge them as independent actors, though, which would have hurt her thesis. The problem with assigning this book as summer reading for incoming university students is that it reinforces every prejudice they are likely to have about people just getting by. This is not broadening. In fact I think the book is a great litmus test- if you take it seriously you don’t understand what being poor in this country is really about.

By: John Rynne

John Rynne — Fri, 29 Aug 2003 21:16:26 +0000

Four words: Dean Smith, Michael Jordan Dean who???. Michael who??? (oh, the guy who makes the running shoes)

By: Don Hosek

Don Hosek — Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:08:23 +0000

We went through this last year with UNC’s summer book as well. I think it has much less to do with the book itself and with political posturing in the state.

By: John Thacker

John Thacker — Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:48:56 +0000

I think it would be extremely interesting if they balanced her (admittedly political) book with a book taking nearly the opposite view. Cox and Alm’s Myths of Rich and Poor certainly is a well-argued, well-research text arguing the opposite view—that, economically, life for poor Americans (the lowest 20%) now is better off than the average person 25 years ago. It takes a very statistical approach, rather than entertaining anecdotes, though.

By: Charles

Charles — Mon, 14 Jul 2003 23:13:03 +0000

Any book that inspires us to passion, one way or the other, is good. In some ways there is no other reason for a book to exist. Passion, expecially intellectual passion (an oxymoron?), is always good.

By: Con Tendem

Con Tendem — Mon, 14 Jul 2003 21:29:02 +0000

I was about to jump in when ruth beat me to it. This is not a class, or a list of recommended reading. It is, typically, a short book everyone incoming is required to read so that a short seminar of a couple of hours can be spent dicussing it and getting to “know one another”. Choosing a polarizing book is actually, I think, a good choice since that helps to get discussions going.
I think the controversy over this, and other, programs of this kind are overblown. Hundreds, if not thousands, of schools assign these and so one or two a year is not a high ratio. Moreoever, this is not exactly a year-long investigative study. Some editor thought asking a bunch of low-level functionaries about this book would be fun. You can bet the politicians who said that they neve rread the book AND have no comment are not featured in the story. So whoever decides that any publicity is good gets a choice quote of “never read it but i am sure it is the spawn of the devil”. Same goes for students, they choose a couple of good soundbites, chop off the rest of the interview and saddle UNC with a controversy. For the record, my reading selection was “Frankenstein” which could easily generate the same kind of controvesry given enough questions by a reporter.

By: Ruth Feingold

Ruth Feingold — Mon, 14 Jul 2003 15:04:15 +0000

Just a quick note, on a point many people seem curious about: UNC didn’t assign this book for summer reading, as in “this is what you should spend your summer reading.” The idea is to take ONE book and make sure every new student has read it by the begininning of Orientation, so that discussions about it—both formal and informal—can be part of O-week. The book’s supposed to serve as a source for talking points, as a connection between former strangers who are now going to be part of the same intellectual community, and as a platform for Orientation leaders to show new students how texts are supposed to be talked about in college classes. So no, you can’t manage to require multiple authors in order to have different points of view for this exercise; ideally, the readers can provide at least some differences in their takes on the chosen book. And yes, it’s worth assigning the book even it doesn’t “prove anything”: among other things, one of the primary points I try to teach my students is that I’m having them read books not to get facts, but to get ideas. And yes, the VP who wants discussion without controversy sounds pretty silly. And yes, the Senator who equates reading an idea he doesn’t like with “discrimination” is even sillier.

By: Jurjen

Jurjen — Mon, 14 Jul 2003 11:05:38 +0000

Ah, there’s the rub, fontana labs; the Lord taketh the tithes and redistributeth them to the needy wait and retail staff. But not, of course, to the atheists among them, which is why Ehrenreich didn’t get a cut. forbidden smiley You know, my wife read that book (and I think I ought to as well, but I’m on a former Yugoslavia binge lately) and worked her way through college doing retail jobs; she says, based on her experience, it’s all pretty plausible. So it’s not “science”; call it “investigative journalism” instead (Gunther Walraff did something similar with Ganz Unten fifteen or twenty years ago). But who says the scientific value needs to be in the book itself? I assume some kind of assessment should follow, and if the students correctly identify it as anecdotal evidence, which may or may not be correct, their education has been furthered.

By: Thlayli

Thlayli — Mon, 14 Jul 2003 05:03:05 +0000

“You know, it’s interesting, while I was in India I’d never heard of UNC. It has no international reputation at all. But once you get here in the States, you find out that it is really considered quite an important school.” Four words: Dean Smith, Michael Jordan.

By: Fontana Labs

Fontana Labs — Sun, 13 Jul 2003 23:01:21 +0000

Wait—tithing is supposed to supplant tipping? That can’t be right. (By which I mean that it’s terrible, not that it’s false.) I thought tithing was in the category of charitable contribution, which is just what tipping isn’t, since servers’ wages are adjusted to account for the expected extra. “I’m sorry—what? I have to pay for this? No, there’s been some mistake. You see, I tithe, so it’s like I paid for it already.”

By: Jason McCullough

Jason McCullough — Sun, 13 Jul 2003 00:49:19 +0000

“Side note: Ehrenreich’s descriptions of the hell that is food service and retail (esp the Wal-Mart chapter) make the book highly entertaining and quite readable.” I think the above is a perfectly valid reason to write a book, or assign its reading, even if its not “scientific.”

By: Lawrence Krubner

Lawrence Krubner — Sat, 12 Jul 2003 21:53:31 +0000

North Carolina is the most progressive of all the Southern states but it is torn in a schizoid manner. The Senate election contest of 1990 summed up the matter well: every city of 40,000 or more went for Harvey Gant, but the rural countryside was solid for Jesse Helms. Things haven’t changed much. Throughout North Carlolina you have islands of shocking moderness of which Chapel Hill/Research Triangle Park is perhaps the best example. I lived in Chapel Hill for 4 years and had many students as friends (I was about their age at the time). Chapel Hill, and the university, are both remarkable for their vitality. The surrounding countryside contains pockets of poverty that you would not think possible in a modern industrial society. For those of you in Britian and elsewhere: I had a roommate for awhile from India who was getting his Ph.d in bio research. He remarked to me at one point: “You know, it’s interesting, while I was in India I’d never heard of UNC. It has no international reputation at all. But once you get here in the States, you find out that it is really considered quite an important school.”

By: Nick

Nick — Sat, 12 Jul 2003 10:05:15 +0000

As for the Christians mentioned in the book, I only remember the same ones Fontana refers to. What Ehrenreich doesn’t note is that there are a lot of Protestant groups (such as Pentecostals) that don’t tip because they give 10-15% to God, thus absolving them of the need to tip in this life. I’m sure I’ve oversimplified the religion and reasoning here (so anyone who knows more can feel free to correct me), but a couple years in the restaurant business (as I continue to make my way through school) have alerted me to certain truisms as such. Side note: It’s generally very difficult to tell who will tip well and who won’t, which generally means everyone gets good service, which makes it quite disappointing when you bust your rear for a table and they leave you a Jack Chick tract for a tip. :-P

By: Nick

Nick — Sat, 12 Jul 2003 09:53:55 +0000

To respond to the comments about my comment: Jeremy: Admittedly, I don’t necessarily think Marx and Nietzsche are as opposite as the course would have liked. In fact, I wrote a research paper for a German course that basically proposed that Marx and Nieztsche were the far ends of an Aristotlian golden mean; they agreed on as much as they disagreed. (The paper wasn’t that great, but being two years later, I think I could write a far better one.) That not withstanding, I mentioned Marx more because the Manifesto was the Obligatory Socialist Part of the Class™. Smith would have been far better as a counter to Marx; later versions of the class were in fact taught with the Marx/Smith set. Nonetheless, the Taoism/Confucianism dichotomy, et al still make the point. In a class about Shakespeare, I suppose it would be expected to learn about how great Shakespeare was. I took an Ameican Lit class with a prof who is one of the preeminent scholars on Edgar Allen Poe (Dr Arthur Brown at the University of Evansville), and as expected, we concentrated heavily on Poe. But in a class that is supposed to have a broad view – or on a reading list for all incoming students – a single, heavily biased view just isn’t enough. Back40: In all honesty, that’s probably the highest compliment I’ve received on innumerable comments/posts. I am, admittedly, quite sure of my beliefs. I naturally think that if everyone thought the way I did, the world would be a much better place… but it would also be very, very boring. Thus, I try to always be open to new ways of looking at things. I like to pretend I’m perfect (ask my girlfriend, heh), but of course, there’s always a lot more to learn. A closed mind is the closest approximation to hell I can think of. Also, if you could post here (or email me) a link to the Tim Dunlop essay you refer to, it would be greatly appreciated. I’m kind of curious to see the full paper. Thanks!

By: fontana labs

fontana labs — Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:00:37 +0000

One thing I like about the choice is that it will tell students a little bit of what it’s like to live on minimum wage. No, it’s not social science, but it’s something people starting at Princeton or UNC should know, if they don’t already. The only Christians I remember from the text are the overly pious, pray-out-loud types who are also lousy tippers. If Cornell can do a study on african-american tipping habits, maybe we can get some data on this. Quick, somebody write up a grant proposal.