Scan barcode
statman's review
3.0
As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints, I was interested to see Chuas description of "Mormons" in a positive light compared tp other depictions elsewhere. One of my key takeaways, what parents teach their lids does matter and discipline is a key part of that teaching.
holodoxa's review
3.0
The triple package claim is an argument that proves everything (so proves nothing). The argument and analysis is exceedingly sloppy and plainly incorrect in many places (e.g. stereotype threat/lift is bunk, grit is not a better predictor of success than IQ, impulse control aka executive function is the most heritable cognitive traits). Culture is of course important to explaining group and national differences but qualitative sentiment constructs like superiority sentiment, status anxiety, and perseverance don't have explanatory power. Very disappointing work.
Despite this there is some interesting descriptive content in the book and the general message is salutary.
Despite this there is some interesting descriptive content in the book and the general message is salutary.
lizbusby's review
3.0
Basically, this book reads as a sequel to the ideas in "The Righteous Mind" by Jonathan Haidt. It discusses exactly what we are missing out on as a liberal society by dropping the value of "loyalty" or "in-group out-group" thinking.
Of course, the book focuses rather heavily on Jewish and Chinese examples given the nature of the authors. I expected the book to be much more balanced, but the other groups mentioned don't feature much. As a Mormon, I was hoping to see a bit more of us, but what was written was mostly accurate. They could have strengthened their Mormon inferiority complex argument by pointing out the huge tensions between Mormons and pretty much any other Christian sect. Being actively preached against at other churches will definitely give you something to prove. I felt like this book was done on fairly minimal research and could have been better if the examples were more evenly distributed across the cultures.
Also, I didn't particularly agree about the possibility of creating an in-group out of inclusiveness. I'm not sure a group defined by excluding no one would really provide the same motivation as a religion or ethnic heritage.
But all said, enjoyable read.
Of course, the book focuses rather heavily on Jewish and Chinese examples given the nature of the authors. I expected the book to be much more balanced, but the other groups mentioned don't feature much. As a Mormon, I was hoping to see a bit more of us, but what was written was mostly accurate. They could have strengthened their Mormon inferiority complex argument by pointing out the huge tensions between Mormons and pretty much any other Christian sect. Being actively preached against at other churches will definitely give you something to prove. I felt like this book was done on fairly minimal research and could have been better if the examples were more evenly distributed across the cultures.
Also, I didn't particularly agree about the possibility of creating an in-group out of inclusiveness. I'm not sure a group defined by excluding no one would really provide the same motivation as a religion or ethnic heritage.
But all said, enjoyable read.
shoelessmama's review
4.0
Fascinating, well researched and honest. I'll be thinking about this one for a while.
emiged's review
3.0
Amy Chua is no stranger to controversial, provocative writing. Her 2011 bestseller Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, which delved into her personal experiences with the successes and pitfalls of "Chinese parenting", spurred hundreds, if not thousands, of reviews and blog posts, often scathing and extremely critical of Chua both as a mother and as a person.
In contrast to Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, The Triple Package is much less personal and more detached in its approach. (It should be noted that she co-wrote this book with her husband, Jed Rubenfeld, which may account for at least some of the difference in tone.) She seems to still want to encourage conversation in a deliberately provocative way, but not to open herself up to so much personal criticism. Can't blame her at all after the firestorm she weathered with her last book.
The Triple Package starts with a bold thesis: there are three traits that can predict whether or not your minority group will be successful in America. These traits are a superiority complex, a keen sense of insecurity, and strong impulse control. Chua and Rubenfeld point out several groups that meet these criteria, including Cuban Americans, Nigerian Americans, and Iranian Americans, among others.
Frankly, the main reason I was drawn to this book is that Mormons are one of the groups Chua and Rubenfeld identify as "starkly outperform[ing] others." It's always nice to hear an outsider describe a group you identify with in positive terms. (I guess that would be my Mormon superiority complex showing...or would that be my Mormon insecurity?)
Chua & Rubenfeld's examples are compelling and backed by research. They dig into history and culture to identify why each of these groups has all of the elements of the Triple Package, pointing out not only the positives but also the dark underbelly of the Triple Package traits. Far from touting the Triple Package as the answer to all our problems, they warn "the Triple Package always comes at a price."
To read the rest of this review, visit Build Enough Bookshelves.
In contrast to Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, The Triple Package is much less personal and more detached in its approach. (It should be noted that she co-wrote this book with her husband, Jed Rubenfeld, which may account for at least some of the difference in tone.) She seems to still want to encourage conversation in a deliberately provocative way, but not to open herself up to so much personal criticism. Can't blame her at all after the firestorm she weathered with her last book.
The Triple Package starts with a bold thesis: there are three traits that can predict whether or not your minority group will be successful in America. These traits are a superiority complex, a keen sense of insecurity, and strong impulse control. Chua and Rubenfeld point out several groups that meet these criteria, including Cuban Americans, Nigerian Americans, and Iranian Americans, among others.
Frankly, the main reason I was drawn to this book is that Mormons are one of the groups Chua and Rubenfeld identify as "starkly outperform[ing] others." It's always nice to hear an outsider describe a group you identify with in positive terms. (I guess that would be my Mormon superiority complex showing...or would that be my Mormon insecurity?)
Chua & Rubenfeld's examples are compelling and backed by research. They dig into history and culture to identify why each of these groups has all of the elements of the Triple Package, pointing out not only the positives but also the dark underbelly of the Triple Package traits. Far from touting the Triple Package as the answer to all our problems, they warn "the Triple Package always comes at a price."
To read the rest of this review, visit Build Enough Bookshelves.
minzhong's review
4.0
Could have given a better treatment to how the "triple package" works in context of institutional inequalities - I think there was about one footnote dedicated to this. Other than that, this was well researched and well written.
cherrytan's review
2.0
3 stars because this book was reasonably well-backed up with references (as observed in the endnotes). However, for a supposedly academic book, it was sensationalised with heavy cultural stereotypes and very presumptuous assumptions that make it less credible -- which is rather unfortunate because one would expect professors from Yale to be nothing less than credible and reliable.
Some assumptions I took issue with pertain to Chinese people, especially when the authors refer to Chinese outside of America:
1) "Today, Chinese kids -- in America as in the rest of the world -- are typically raised on a diet of stories about how Chinese civilization is the oldest and most magnificent in world history... -- and ditto Chinese cuisine." (page 122)
2) "Visit just about any primary school in China, Taiwan or Singapore, and rather than children running around exploring and being rewarded for spontaneity and originality, you'll find students sitting upright, drilling, memorizing, and reciting excruciatingly long passages." (Page 126)
3) "After school and on weekends, it is rare for even very young children to 'hang out with friends'". (page 126)
4) "Being 'deeply proud of Chinese culture' can easily shade into 'We'll disown you if you marry someone non-Chinese'." (page 156)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Never happened to me, nor most of the people I know around me. Sure, my parents have told me stuff about ancient China, but never bragged about how the Chinese are supposedly 'superior' to every other group in world history. It was informative, not narcissism and elitism.
2) This is absolutely false. The system here is stressful, no doubt, but it is not as disgustingly strict as the authors presume it to be. Absolutely, 100% presumptuous. I never felt that pressure in primary school. Kids don't even have to take exams in their first two years in primary school to make the transition easier for them, originality and spontaneity is usually rewarded as appropriate. I have never been made to drill, memorize and excruciatingly recite impossibly long passages. It is unwise to assume these things that are merely uninformed and ignorant stereotypes. Shame on the authors, especially given how well-read they are.
3) While true, it is more for safety reasons than for wanting to trap children in enrichment lessons of all sorts. Having a conservative mindset means not feeling very secure about having your five-year-old child running around on weekends alone with their friends. At most, playtime is supervised and "very young children" should not, in our views, be left alone to "hang out" unsupervised because if something goes wrong, no one old enough is present to help. Another baseless assumption made in poor taste.
4) Exaggeration in academic writing makes your claim look immature. This claim is not true, especially with the younger generation of Chinese who feel the need to take control of their own future and not let others do it for them.
Basically, what I take issue with is the many careless assumptions that were made in bad taste, perhaps to stir controversy and increase readership. It is disturbing that tricks like these would be employed by learned academics. I cannot say the same for the other groups explored, but this book, while exploring a valid concept, is rendered unreliable especially when cultural stereotypes are used excessively (and not proved well enough). Using isolated examples to prove a claim does nothing to show the validity and applicability of it to the group as a whole, as isolated examples may well be exceptions to the rule. Even if not the exception, it is not an accurate reflection of the group as a whole.
What the authors could have done to improve is to have conducted more of their own research instead of relying on 'many studies' and 'relevant studies'. Perhaps they could have added superscripts next to their claims to show that the relevant point has been backed up in the endnotes. That would make the lot of their claims look a whole less presumptuous.
Overall, this book was more entertaining than stimulating or informative. Pity, given the ideas were relevant and had so much potential to be explored to greater depths.
Some assumptions I took issue with pertain to Chinese people, especially when the authors refer to Chinese outside of America:
1) "Today, Chinese kids -- in America as in the rest of the world -- are typically raised on a diet of stories about how Chinese civilization is the oldest and most magnificent in world history... -- and ditto Chinese cuisine." (page 122)
2) "Visit just about any primary school in China, Taiwan or Singapore, and rather than children running around exploring and being rewarded for spontaneity and originality, you'll find students sitting upright, drilling, memorizing, and reciting excruciatingly long passages." (Page 126)
3) "After school and on weekends, it is rare for even very young children to 'hang out with friends'". (page 126)
4) "Being 'deeply proud of Chinese culture' can easily shade into 'We'll disown you if you marry someone non-Chinese'." (page 156)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Never happened to me, nor most of the people I know around me. Sure, my parents have told me stuff about ancient China, but never bragged about how the Chinese are supposedly 'superior' to every other group in world history. It was informative, not narcissism and elitism.
2) This is absolutely false. The system here is stressful, no doubt, but it is not as disgustingly strict as the authors presume it to be. Absolutely, 100% presumptuous. I never felt that pressure in primary school. Kids don't even have to take exams in their first two years in primary school to make the transition easier for them, originality and spontaneity is usually rewarded as appropriate. I have never been made to drill, memorize and excruciatingly recite impossibly long passages. It is unwise to assume these things that are merely uninformed and ignorant stereotypes. Shame on the authors, especially given how well-read they are.
3) While true, it is more for safety reasons than for wanting to trap children in enrichment lessons of all sorts. Having a conservative mindset means not feeling very secure about having your five-year-old child running around on weekends alone with their friends. At most, playtime is supervised and "very young children" should not, in our views, be left alone to "hang out" unsupervised because if something goes wrong, no one old enough is present to help. Another baseless assumption made in poor taste.
4) Exaggeration in academic writing makes your claim look immature. This claim is not true, especially with the younger generation of Chinese who feel the need to take control of their own future and not let others do it for them.
Basically, what I take issue with is the many careless assumptions that were made in bad taste, perhaps to stir controversy and increase readership. It is disturbing that tricks like these would be employed by learned academics. I cannot say the same for the other groups explored, but this book, while exploring a valid concept, is rendered unreliable especially when cultural stereotypes are used excessively (and not proved well enough). Using isolated examples to prove a claim does nothing to show the validity and applicability of it to the group as a whole, as isolated examples may well be exceptions to the rule. Even if not the exception, it is not an accurate reflection of the group as a whole.
What the authors could have done to improve is to have conducted more of their own research instead of relying on 'many studies' and 'relevant studies'. Perhaps they could have added superscripts next to their claims to show that the relevant point has been backed up in the endnotes. That would make the lot of their claims look a whole less presumptuous.
Overall, this book was more entertaining than stimulating or informative. Pity, given the ideas were relevant and had so much potential to be explored to greater depths.
More...