Outliers, book review

“Outliers are those who have been given opportunities — and who have had the strength and presence of mind to seize them” (Gladwell 267).

Malcolm Gladwell. Speaking from experience, his books are compelling and fun. I read “Blink,” and it was fascinating, a book on “rapid cognition:” the ability to make decisions that involve numerous variables in the blink of an eye (like a quarterback during a play, or a policeman pulling the trigger).

Outliers, to be frank, wasn’t my first choice. I leaned more towards “David and Goliath,” his work on underdogs and misfits.

Outliers takes a stab at society’s typical view of successful people. When my brother asked me how I was liking the book, the quote from President Obama, about businesses, saying, “You didn’t build that,” came to mind.

From what I’ve read so far, the paradigm shift happens as Gladwell first dispels the “success story” myth then enlightens the reader on the “oppurtunity factor.”

Typical story-telling seems to emphasize the triumphs of the successful person. The hero, for lack of a better word, is displayed as someone who fought against odds, used his own skills, defied the consensus, and, on his own, rose to stardom. Gladwell admits that individual prowess is a key ingredient, but that luck, or rather, opportunity, plays just as an important role.

An example given in Outliers earlier says that one may intuitively assume that the best players in Canada make their way to elite hockey because they are good. In fact, the research shows that it has more to do with when a person is born. Those born in January are more likely to be professional hockey players because they will be the oldest players (because of the cut-off date to play in prominent youth hockey). This example illustrates well that success isn’t what it seems.

Gladwell cites big names like Bill Gates and the Beatles to show that it wasn’t a mystical event, these two becoming who they were, but rather the situations they found themselves in. Bill Gates happened to have access to a computer (rare at the time) through connections he had at his high school, while the Beatles played eight hours a day seven days a week before ever coming to America (helping them reach the powerful 10,000 hours, studies show, it takes to become masterful at something).

I wondered as I read this book, if Gladwell is trying to inspire us or piss on our dreams. It seems, in a way, Gladwell is attempting to rouse us from our fantasy version of how the greats become great. He basically diminishes great people, saying that, “You’re not so smart, it’s just that life threw you a handy set of circumstances.”

One, like myself, still apt to defend people we view as excellent human beings who have risen, sometimes against all odds, to do great things may say: “Hey! They still had to take bold decisions and stick out!” To which, I would imagine, Malcolm would alter his thesis and say, “Life threw you a handy set of circumstances…that anyone would take advantage of, just as anyone takes advantage of whatever comes there way, as long as it isn’t too demanding, (and being presented with a computer [Bill Gates] or a venue [the Beatles] isn’t that much of a strain to take advantage of).

There is also some interesting stories about geniuses. The parallel of one genius, who didn’t receive a degree and today is little know of, verse one who helped make the nuclear bomb, is given. Both are highly intelligent, but why did one become great while the other faltered and today is bitter? Gladwell would say it is because of the Outlier phenomenon: where the two grew up, their family, people skills; many other factors besides just brilliance, which is so often attributed as the sole propeller of those who “make it.”

Part two emphasizes the importance of culture in the making of a person. This is not a new idea. The principle of differing cultures are branded into students at my college and, I am sure, at other colleges.

What’s powerful about part two, and this can be found in part one, is the entertaining and telling stories. Gladwell is, after all, a journalist, so telling stories is his forte; and in “Outliers” he makes his points through them.

Apart from the current culture that one lives in or grew up in, Gladwell preaches that a culture’s influence on a person goes back pretty much as far back in time as that culture does.

Gladwell chronicles some of the tendencies of people from the American South, then traces these tendencies back hundreds of years. Gladwell is bold and says, in affect, that, “Hey, listen up, where you are from matters,” as if it is not politically correct to agree to this. In his defense, some people do abhor being labeled merely by their environment.

My favorite story is when Gladwell talks about a series of plane crashes. Through the black box as well as an understanding of the cultures in question, Gladwell demonstrates the significance of differing backgrounds.

An American pilot is flanked by two Colombian assistants, one being the co-pilot and the other the engineer. The American pilot is clearly tired and doing things wrong which, in conjunction with other factors, leads to the crash. However, since the pilot is “above” the engineer and co-pilot in societal rank (according to Colombian culture) the two of them do not feel comfortable pointing out what the captain is doing wrong or should do instead. They give subtle hints, but no more, then the plane crashes.

Overall, part one of “Outliers” confused me. I didn’t understand what Gladwell was getting at; he basically downplayed people who do great things or end up in great places. Part two left a positive impression on me, however. I had, before reading it, looked at the individual (his personalities and experiences) as the most important factor in what that person does. Part two taught me how important what our cultural background is, and that one might even have to go back in time several generations to get a full grasp on the entirety of said culture.