In August of last year, Malcolm Gladwell wrote "The Risk Pool," an article about pension systems published in the New Yorker.  Judging by the reaction of his readers, it was the worst thing he has ever written. 

Gladwell usually remains cool-headed and diplomatic, but he was so rattled by the reaction to his article that it was about a month before he said something intelligent in response.  When he finally did calm down, though, the explanation he provided for his "prickliness" was nothing short of brilliant: 

"I'm not usually thin-skinned in the face of critics. So why did I react the way I did? I think it was a degree of difficulty question. What I was saying, unconsciously, was not--"you don't understand how good that story was." It was, rather--"you don't understand how HARD that story was." Because, in truth, it was a really, really hard story. How on earth do you write 5000 words on pensions without putting your audience to sleep? It's pretty tricky, and what I wanted in my heart of hearts, I suppose, was for at least some appreciation of that effort. Even if it was a bogey, I wanted the announcer to point out what a great bogey it was."

If Gladwell struggled to put together 5000 words about pensions without putting readers to sleep, then how can one begin to criticize Christopher Buckley's new book Boomsday, which takes on the intergenerational unfairness of Social Security for over 300 pages?  And who would be in a place to do so? 

Certainly not I, and that is why I'll keep my remarks about Boomsday short.  Before making some comments about the content of the book, though, I should note the obvious:  People who care about this issue should be grateful to Buckley for writing Boomsday.  Social Security reform isn't going to happen until it dawns on the average citizen how serious the problem of entitlements is, and Boomsday just might get the American public engaged.  So whether the purity of an author's intentions should or should not count toward the judgement of a book's quality, I think Buckley deserves some credit regardless of what one thinks of the writing. 

Now, on to the book: The back cover includes a Tom Wolfe quote that Buckley is "One of the funniest writers in the English language," the inclusion of which is relevant for a couple reasons.  The first is that like Wolfe in his book I am Charlotte Simmons, Buckley doesn't exactly nail the voice of a young person.  Both Charlotte Simmons and Boomsday very nearly get down the dialogue and details of their characters, but there are times when each writer is noticeably off. 

Second, Buckley is damn funny.  Some of the subplots wear a bit thin before the book begins winding down, but it is a testament to Buckley's sense of humor and his ability to write that Boomsday is ultimately an enjoyable read. 

In the end, I am not sure whether Boomsday is at par or if it's slightly better.  But even if the book is no better than par, it's worth pointing out what a great par Buckley has made.

Comments