Monoculture: How One Story is Changing Everything

by F.S. Michaels

Winner of the George Orwell Award. One of The Atlantic's best books of the year.

As human beings, we've always told stories: stories about who we are, where we come from, and where we're going. Now imagine that one of those stories is taking over the others, narrowing our diversity and creating a monoculture. Because of the rise of the economic story, six areas of your world - your work, your relationships with others and the environment, your community, your physical and spiritual health, your education, and your creativity - are changing, or have already changed, in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. And because how you think shapes how you act, the monoculture isn't just changing your mind - it's changing your life.

“A single lucid narrative that’s bound to first make you somewhat uncomfortable and insecure, then give you the kind of pause from which you can step back and move forward with more autonomy, authenticity and mindfulness than ever.” - Maria Popova, BrainPickings

“A thin, enrapturing gem. It’s accessible, sensible—exactly the sort of book that should have (and still could + should!) take off and create a tiny little dent in books.” - The Kenyon Review

“Michaels offers a smart and realistic guide to first recognizing the monoculture and the challenges of transcending its limitations, then considering ways in which we, as sentient and autonomous individuals, can move past its confines to live a more authentic life within a broader spectrum of human values.” - The Atlantic

“5 stars: The cause and effect of our world is more surprising than you’d think. With intriguing notions about the driving ideas of stories in every shape of our life, “Monoculture” is an incredibly fascinating look at how the mind works and today’s consumer culture.” - Midwest Book Review

“If you just read one book this year, read this one…You won’t just be considering the narrative of the culture in which you live, you’ll be considering the everyday choices you make in your life. But the best part of the story is that the author affords you the opportunity to pick up your pen and demand a rewrite…A mind-altering work.” - BuriedInPrint.com

Genres: Nonfiction, Psychology, Sociology, Economics, Philosophy, Cultural, Society

202 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2011

About the author

Winner of the George Orwell Award. One of The Atlantic's best books of the year.

In Monoculture, F.S. Michaels draws on extensive research and makes surprising connections among disciplines to take a big-picture look at how one story is changing everything.

Michaels' research and writing have been supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the Killam Trusts, and regional and municipal arts councils. Michaels has an MBA, and completed five years of PhD studies in Organizational Analysis. She lives in British Columbia, Canada.

Reviews

[su · Rating 4 out of 5]

David Kelley, pulitzer prize winning historian:

“The entire Bay Area is enamored with these notions of innovation, creativity, entrepreneurship, mega-success,” he says. “It’s in the air we breathe out here. It’s an atmosphere that can be toxic to ... refuge, contemplation, and investigation for its own sake.”


I give this book 5 stars for quality of ideas, 2.5 stars for quality of execution. I think this is a very important book with a critical message. I'm glad I came across this book (thanks Caterina!) because I've been wanting to find a way to articulate what it is that I find so lacking about the Silicon Valley way of life. ("You find something remiss in the Silicon Valley narrative? Then you must not be as innovative, creative, or entrepreneurial as the rest of us!")

The book's message is that we're now in a time of monocultural homogeneity, where the primary narrative, the governing pattern of our lives, is an economic one. "The governing pattern that a culture obeys is a master story - one narrative in society that takes over the others, shrinking diversity and forming a monoculture." According to the author, the story that is dominating our shared cultural identify is an economic story - that defines who you are as a human being, what the world is like, and how you and that world (and other people) interact as individualistic, economic, rational, productivity&efficiency gauging actors. This economic story has pervaded all parts of our lives - turning healthcare, education, religion, government into "industries" and reduced relationships into transactions.

(So though the book isn't about Silicon Valley specifically, I found it particularly apropos in describing the survival of the fittest, market driven, growth oriented, efficiency obsessed culture of the tech/startup industry. Perhaps what the startup people clamor to say is true - as far as the current narrative driving the world forward goes, Silicon Valley (&China) is the heart of the engine.)

I give the book 2.5 stars for execution because its as if the author wrote purposefully with a style that seems to be aimed at deprogramming cult-brainwashed minds: that is, by stringing together a number of simplistic, uncontroversial sentences that lull potentially resistant readers into agreeing, then sucker punching them at the end when they realize that all of what they have assumed to be their individualistic beliefs have actually been inherited by repeat, pervasive osmosis. So the book has the effect of being repetitive and simplistic.

But still, the book's message is important.

"If we fail to understand how the monoculture shapes our lives and our world, we're at risk of making decisions day after day without ever really understanding how our choices are being predetermined, without understanding how the monoculture even shapes what we think our options are."

[Lance Thornswood · Rating 2 out of 5]

The principal thesis behind this book is intriguing: In biology monocultures are a bad thing because they weaken the natural bio-diversity of a species, making it more susceptible to a disastrous pest or disease or leaving it less able to adapt to other changes in its environment. This is a well-accepted theory.

Now suppose that same concept also holds true for ideas, especially the key ideas underlying our civilization: religion, community, education, work, relationships. If those are also dominated by a monoculture of thought, the author F.S. Michaels posits, then the institutions are at greater risk of collapse and are far less resilient in the face of sudden changes or unexpected obstacles. She then outlines some of the monocultures of thought of which we may be unaware, in an effort to provoke more diverse thought, debate, and at least to question to assumptions that got us all thinking the same way in the first place.

I LOVE the concept of this book, and most of what the author has to say is very relevant, thought provoking, and timely.

Sadly, the structure of the book makes it monotonous to read: as the author explores the monocultures present in so many aspects of our lives, each chapter takes on a templated feel: each institution is dissected in exactly the same way. It becomes so repetitive in structure and tone that it's very difficult to stay engaged in the book. I read it cover to cover, but it took great will to do so.

I think the author has a brilliant mind, and I want to see more from her. With critical feedback and a ruthless editor, her great ideas will sing so we can't put the next book down.

[Grant · Rating 3 out of 5]

I think the premise of the book is much more intriguing than the actual read. The premise is that every period in history is dominated by a master story (e.g. the religion story, the science story), and that our period is dominated by the economic story. Monoculture refers to the effect that this master story has on culture: "one narrative in society that takes over the others, shrinking diversity and forming a monoculture." The author argues that values such as truth, beauty, justice, and freedom are being displaced by economic values such as capitalization, competitiveness, efficiency, and growth.

I was under the impression that after reading this book, the veil of the economic story would perhaps be lifted, allowing me to see beyond the monoculture which has so thoroughly dominated my thoughts and the thoughts of my common man. The reality is that there is no big secret or plan revealed within the pages of this book, and personal contemplation on its premise would probably reveal as much as reading it would.

In conclusion, if you are on a pursuit for truth and if I were curating your required reading list, I would not include this book; but if you love to read and would like to learn about how economics is affecting our lives in terms of our work, relationships with others and the natural world, community, physical and spiritual health, education, and creativity, this is a light, enjoyable read.

[Abner Rosenweig · Rating 4 out of 5]

F.S. Michaels artfully avoids one word throughout her book: capitalism. The entire book is a critique of capitalism, or at least the renegade form of hyper-capitalism we find ourselves suffocating from in the West. By cleverly shielding the reader from the c-word and avoiding polarizing political and economic labels, she encourages readers to simply look at the facts and judge for themselves whether the current economic culture, which pervades all aspects of daily life from relationships to nature to community to health to education, creativity, and beyond, is working for us. When the facts are laid bare through Michaels' outstanding research, it becomes clear that the current economic paradigm, or "monoculture" as Michaels calls it, creates major problems at all levels of society. The vast majority of us feel there's something seriously wrong with our Western way of living. Michaels' "Monoculture" presents a unified critique of our collective ills, and it is potent in its clarity. Other works have similar critiques -- I recommend Eisenstein's "Sacred Economics" for a more theoretical approach that contains fanastic prescriptions for change; also Thomas Moore's "Care of the Soul" for a more poetic approach to reclaiming humanity in our mechanized, materialistic lives -- but Monoculture is a wonderfully clear treatise on the problems of our modern world, and a great companion to anyone seeking to understand the roots of our decaying culture.

[Jordan Munn · Rating 1 out of 5]

The concept of monoculture is intriguing and worthy of thorough insight and discussion. This book, however, was not that. Instead, it's a superficial, formulaic, often-overstated, predictable diatribe against economics as the least common denominator that one is very likely to hear at some stoner gathering in an undergraduate dorm.

One positive takeaway is that the bibliography is really impressive. The goal of the book is very commendable, but it's a failure in the execution.

[Tim · Rating 4 out of 5]

Money, it's a hit - Pink Floyd

This book is about cultural patterns the author refers to as 'master stories;' a term she uses to explain how humans understand the world. A master story is the dominant idea at a given time in history, the grid laid over society that shapes how we understand it. She puts it like this:

'The governing pattern that a culture obeys is a master story – one narrative in society that takes over the others, shrinking diversity and forming a monoculture. When you're inside a master story at a particular time in history, you tend to accept its definition of reality. You unconsciously believe and act on certain things, and disbelieve and fail to act on other things. That's the power of the monoculture; it's able to direct us without us knowing too much about it.'

The author begins by considering previous monocultures: the religious monoculture and the scientific monoculture. There is a certain amount of myopia on her part inasmuch as she only considers the western hemisphere. Yes, it is true that there was a religious culture in sixteenth century Europe and that it pervaded every aspect of life to a degree that everyone assumed defacto it was correct. Since she does not state otherwise, would it be correct to assume the author is of the opinion that sixteenth century Europe was the entirety of the civilized world at the time? Because unless that is the case, it was not really a monoculture. Nevertheless, I understand the point she is making. Everyone thought a certain way – the way the society they belonged to thought - but being a little bit more expansive would not have hurt her case. At one time almost all societies revolved around the dictates of some spiritual system or other. The axis in the axial age was religion.

Things changed over time and along came another monoculture: the scientific monoculture ushered in by the Enlightenment. Again, a small criticism. It was not pure reason that toppled the religious culture that preceded it. It was already so splintered by the time of the enlightenment that the entire continent was in a state of discord. Economic rather than scientific considerations stopped people from fighting and begin co-operating. People began to organize around mutually beneficial exchanges. It is here that the current master story finds its roots.

Neither the religious nor the scientific cultures have disappeared in the present age but both have to some extent been subsumed by the present economic monoculture. The prosperity gospel is the most obvious example of this where religion is concerned, though the book documents many other instances of it. Scientific knowledge is pursued to the extent that there is some return of investment on it; it is less commonly pursued as an end in itself or because it is beneficial to people and the planet. The bulk of this book is comprised of chapters examining how the economic master story dominates, controls, and sometimes distorts every other area of life: work, relationships, community, physical and spiritual health, education, and creativity.

The point of this book is not to make people feel that they shouldn't have nice things or to summon them to rise up and burn civilization to the ground so we can build something new and better from the ashes. In a concluding chapter the author wants to speak to the individual and urge them to be more mindful of the all pervasive master story and choose the extent to which they let it dictate their choices and actions.

[Tilda · Rating 2 out of 5]

I went into this book expecting something else. I was interested in the idea of how the stories we tell ourselves (whether individually or collectively) shape our decisions or behaviours. This book is basically about how capitalism has ruined everything (education, creativity, science and religion) which for a leftie like me, is not telling me anything I don’t already know. Some pretty basic ideas here, well referenced and expressed.

[Emma Sea · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well, fuck. Yes. This. All of this.

[Peter Landau · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reading MONOCULTURE: HOW ONE STORY IS CHANGING EVERYTHING is like taking the red pill in THE MATRIX. It’ not that I was unaware of how influential the culture of business is, but F.S. Michaels writes about the extent to which it is so persuasive as to pave over all paths and drive our lives, leaving us in the backseat thinking we still have our hands on the wheel, that made me feel as if I had woke up just before going off a cliff.

Every era has its narrative, whether it be religious or scientific or something else, and, according to Michaels, we’re currently living in an economic narrative. She spends much of the book detailing how this economic model impacts education, medicine, religion, creativity, relationships and on and on, and how using the language of transactions changes the way we engage with these institutions and, therefore, how we live our lives.

The final section of the book talks about ways to live a true life, not outside of the economic story -- which isn’t intrinsically bad as much as it’s so overpowering that it flattens the greater dimensions of life -- but a parallel one that operates outside of the morality of supply and demand. It’s made me cognizant of my use of language, which, after all, is how we define the world. That's why, as much as I like this book, I will not refer to it as a good return on your investment.

[Kristen · Rating 1 out of 5]

Booooooooooooorrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnggggggg (Sorry Cate). I usually really like narrative nonfiction (think freakanomics, Malcolm Gladwell, Atul Gawande) but I just couldn't get into this one. I think it was the writing style, honestly - this just read like a textbook to me. I didn't find all the examples of the economic story particularly enlightening. Perhaps, though, my upcoming book club discussion will breathe some new life into it.

[Lynn Weber · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book was more simplistic than I was hoping. It was basically a repetitive critique of capitalism.

[Michael Layden · Rating 5 out of 5]

Simple, easy to digest book, which discusses a complex and grotesque topic. Will be one I will keep additional copies of to get people to think more about how economics frames our view of the world.

[Glen Grunau · Rating 4 out of 5]

It has been almost 9 years since I read this book. Today (February 14, 2021) I began reading another book on economics: ”Doughnut Economics”. One of the first citations in this new book was to reference this ”old” book, prompting me to return to edit a new introduction to this review. Something clearly has been percolating in me as I continue to be distressed by the ongoing perpetual economic injustice that reigns in our world. I hope that reading Doughnut Economics will continue this inner disturbance and further inform my contemplative response to economic injustice. Below is what I wrote 9 years ago.

Jeff Imbach of Soulstream, in his two persuasive essays (below) and in a recent Soulstream partner e-mail exchange, convinced me to read this book. I am aware that I am too little moved by the injustices in our world that have been perpetuated by this monoculture. Perhaps my reading of this book may help to soften my heart.

1) http://www.clarion-journal.com/clario...

2) http://www.clarion-journal.com/clario...


I loved this little book. The author makes a persuasive case that we are presently living in a monoculture - a society dominated in 21st century Western culture by the “economic” story. Without careful reflection, we accept the ways in which the monoculture defines our reality. To remain oblivious to the ways in which a monoculture has such a pervasive influence on our lives, is to be a prisoner of the monoculture. Freedom from such a dominant story is available only to those who through deliberate choice and significant risk, are prepared to align our lives with our deepest values rather than the values dictated by the monoculture.

Although I suppose I could've been surprised by the countless examples provided by the author in which the dominant economic story controls our work, our community, our relationship with others, our physical and spiritual health, our education, and our creativity, many of these examples had a clear ring of truth. I was particularly struck by the chapter on how the dominant economic story affects our physical and spiritual health.

It was concerning to read how the ethical code of the American Medical Association has been compromised in a number of ways as medicine has become increasingly subverted by economic ambition. It was difficult to disagree with this author's statement that the religious institutions of our day have also become dominated by business practice: “churches have to market their products vigorously and compete with other churches for your support . . . In the economic story, America's most successful churches are deemed to be those that modeled themselves on businesses, compete with MBA staffed management teams, strategic plans, identification of target markets, consulting services, and thousands of customers. Pastors are CEOs”.

It was revealing to read a quote from the former executive vice president and business manager of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association: “Our job is to dispense the world's greatest product – with the greatest economy – to the greatest number of people – as fast as possible”. Could it be that what I have come to resist most strongly in my evangelical church tradition in recent years is the very impact of this economic monoculture?!!

The author suggests that if we fail to transcend this dominant economic story, we risk paying a heavy internal price – compromising our own personal values for those of the monoculture in which we live. However, if we do manage to transcend this master story, we risk paying a heavy external price.

I was reminded of the price I have paid for some of my decisions in the past 10 years to resist this monoculture in my church, my family, and in my career. Perhaps the greatest price I have paid is one of obscurity – relinquishing the public recognition, reputation, and gain that are available to those who cooperate with the monoculture. Spiritual truth emerged with clarity for me as the author noted near the conclusion of her book that “It’s easy to believe that a quiet, obscure life that is little known and little seen makes little difference. But it is individuals living quiet lives . . . living hidden lives . . . living unseen lives who give birth to change, who risk retribution, who nurture independence”. Although I never understood from the perspective of the monoculture the full implications of the decisions that my wife and I have made over the years to choose a life of simplicity, it is by the grace of God that we are able to enjoy today some of the freedoms from this monoculture that we enjoy.

Yet this book has impressed me of the need for further change and growth and freedom in my life. I have particularly been challenged to re-evaluate my political views and allegiances. It has struck me how the conservative right-wing governments of Canada and the US have so significantly bought into the economic monoculture. “In the economic story, life gets better when the economy grows . . . Healthcare gets funded. Education gets funded. The arts get funded. Social programs get funded. In short, economic growth enables social growth”. The myth of trickle down economics.

Could it be that this pitch of some right-wing ideology is merely a mythology of the economic monoculture? For the first time in my life, I am being challenged to shift to the left politically. I find myself wondering to what degree my ongoing allegiance to the right represents my indoctrination in the monoculture. I hope that the ideas of this book will continue to guide my decisions and help grant me the courage to pay whatever external price may be required of me to hold to my true self.

[Minervas · Rating 3 out of 5]

I find the book's criticism of the monoculture personally relatable. Unfortunately, it leaves many interesting questions unexplored and unanswered.

First, let me praise the author for acutely sensing the destructive power of the "economic story" - a narrative that treats people as pure rational optimizers. Economics can provide simple, unified, and powerful explanations of human behavior. However, its bare-bones version is too simple to explain the emergent phenomena that make humans interesting, such as passions, cultures, norms, and meanings. If we believe in the economic story too much, we will reduce others and ourselves to survival machines and hedonic automata.

But, I hesitate to agree with the author that the economic story has become the monoculture in the town. I am sure the author strongly feels it, but they have never provided enough proof. How about some opinion surveys? Or historical comparisons? Or cross-country comparisons? Since the author has not provided me with such tools to measure how "mono" the economic story is dominating, I find it hard to buy into the book's premise. I personally feel that American culture is quite diverse and not at all "mono" as the author described, but that's because I live in a tiny corner of the massive social network in the US. I shouldn't take my subjective feelings for granted, and neither should the author.

Lastly, the author believes the "economic story" is the original sin that gives rise to all the vices, such as consumerism, worship of efficiency, disintegration of community, environmental destruction, commodification of education, moral nihilism… The list goes on and on. I can see the connections, but the author's criticism is too overarching and lack specific analysis.

[alcessa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kar okej knjiga, ki daje razmišljati, tudi če čisto vsi opisi in razglabljanja niso zelo prepričljivi - spodbude za lastno razmišljanje se mi zdi pametno ceniti. Pa prevod se mi zdi krasen.

[Chris · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a mess. That's a shame because Michaels makes important, if not novel, observations about the rise of market theory in aspects across our society, and she does a great job of making this message interesting and digestible. With more focus, restraint and effort this could have been a landmark book on contemporary culture. The middle chapters are a moving summary of how economic theory has changed varied aspects of our lives.

The biggest problem is the weakly argued abstraction of the current situation into the "monoculture" phenomenon. Michaels mentions three other examples - religion pre-enlightenment, science during the enlightenment, and communism, but goes into no details and gives no justifications for these. She doesn't flesh out the concept beyond an assertion that it is bad because it destroys diversity and cements a biased point of view as "unbiased". How does a monoculture start? end? are we always moving between monocultures? What existed in Western Culture immediately before the current monoculture? This is a rather large theory to swallow, and Michaels doesn't provide the proof to make it go down smoothly. A book that only considered the dominance of economic forces today would have been leaner, stronger and more persuasive.

The examples she provides are of varied quality. They are most illuminating when she contrasts traditional methods of evaluating a library, public school, etc with how they are valued under economic theory. A frequently re-occurring thread was the dismantling, reduction, or corruption of social programs that were created as late as post-WWII. Are we building economic monoculture or tearing down a leftist monoculture?

I didn't find much value in the final chapter. It came of as a call-to-arms with some glossed over examples of counter-mono-culture movements, and some encouraging slogans.

[Sara Marks · Rating 3 out of 5]

I got this ebook from LibraryThings’ early reviewer program. In exchange for a free copy of the book, I have to post a review.

I have been sitting on this book for months. I just wasn’t in the head space for it until recently. The premise of the book is that our society and culture develops around one common message. The modern message is one of economics. Michaels’ does a good job explaining how the economic message has permeated our lives from our careers and education to our religion and creative activities. Michaels’ uses clear language and makes his case logically using examples of studies, quotes and stories from experts. The way Micahels’ presents his case made me see, in the first chapter, the logic of this. It did not take much for me to understand exactly what he was talking about. Not only did Michael’s make his case, but he discussed what happens when people go against the message and those who have. He looks at three different people and organizations that are working against the economic message. I did especially enjoy the section where Michael’s discussed what is going on in libraries. I think this was the most important section for me.

The problem I had with this, and it seems others have as well, is that he doesn’t take it far enough. He leans to summarizing and giving cursory examples rather than going in depth. Other non-fiction books like this go into much more detail about the studies that give evidence to their points. The books, as a result, reads too much like a logical tirade more than well researched evidence. While many people are OK with that, I want to see real evidence of your point. This became a rant and criticism of society, and it clearly was a criticism, rather than an unbiased observation of what is going on.

[H. · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book completely captured my attention. I thought it would be a hard read but I was intrigued right from the beginning about how I could "transcend" the monoculture once I understood it. I also like how the implications transcend all cultures and all people. The book does a great job of encompassing the main components of most people's lives in the six chapters about work, relationships and the natural world, community, physical and spiritual health, education and creativity - themes that essentially everyone can understand and relate to in some way. Each chapter and main idea is explained very clearly. So many parts made me sit and ask myself questions about what I thought - I found myself doing that through the whole book. Each chapter tells the story about how each idea has been in the past, then transitions into what it has come to look like today and how the economic story has changed things, with really great examples to outline the argument. The main points are supported extremely well by evidence, examples and details. I have learned so much!
This book is truly fabulous. The whole thing inspired me - I walked away with so much to ponder and reflect on. I can't wait to hand it out to others. I found myself so excited about the content. It's all so easy to understand and yet leaves the reader feeling like there is so much depth to what is being said. Truly, truly wonderful.

[X · Rating 5 out of 5]

I want to start this review with one of those deep movie trailer voices - "If there is one non-fiction book you should read this year..." - to get your attention, to add drama but actually I'd really mean it. Read this book.

Full disclosure: FS Michaels is a colleague of mine but this book still kicks non-fiction ass. Michaels takes on the rise of the economic story and shows how it is changing the way that we live:

"As human beings, we’ve always told stories: "stories about who we are, where we come from, and where we’re going." Now imagine that one of those stories is taking over the others, narrowing our diversity and creating a monoculture. Because of the rise of the economic story, six areas of your world — your work, your relationships with others and the environment, your community, your physical and spiritual health, your education, and your creativity — are changing, or have already changed, in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. And because how you think shapes how you act, the monoculture isn’t just changing your mind — it’s changing your life."

This is one of those books that will have you looking at your world a little differently when you're finished. One of my favorite feelings. Now back to practicing my movie voice. "In a time, in a place..."

[Jodi · Rating 4 out of 5]

What I took from this book: we've let money fuck everything up. The economic story has become the dominant one for most everything in life, including things that might should've been left out of it. Things like health care, education, and art. Additionally, when you evaluate everything - having children, your relationships with others, your hobbies even - in terms of how they benefit you (or not) in economic terms, we lose the character of life and of living as humans.

Not everyone wants to live within the monoculture, much like not everyone wanted to live within communist societies. But attempting to live differently than most everyone around you is tough. The author asks, "Do we conform to the monoculture and align ourselves with the economic story, or do we exile ourselves from the story that defines so much of our culture? Asked another way, if life is going to exact a toll no matter what you do, what's stopping you from living exactly as you please, telling your own stories, in line with your own deepest values?"

I feel like that's an excellent point, one of many in the book. It's actually a bit shocking when you start to realize how thoroughly your life and ideas about life are influenced by this main story.

[Jon · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm just in the early stages, but so far, great read. I have some strong thoughts on much of what I;ve read so far, including Michael's accurate description of how our current Economic Monoculture is influencing just about everything is Western lives. I just finished reading his take on those who've tried to mix non-profit with a for-profit model, and his take that "experts" agree this is a bad idea. Coming from the Economic mindset, this makes sense. But my own experience shows that there is yet another way, a path where social good can indeed be mixed with a financially self-sustaining model, freeing "good" efforts from the burden of constantly fundraising and seeking donor-driven support. Not that the classic donor-driven non-profit is bad, but in a post-economic monoculture (assuming that's where we're headed), a financially self-sustaining model of good seems to make sense. This path also takes into account another dimension, one that places the "good" organization into the very fabric of the culture itself, something typical non-profits tend to struggle with. But I'm getting ahead of myself, I haven't yet finished the book!

[Sarah Sammis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Monoculture by F.S. Michaels looks at how the unwritten and unspoken dominant culture of an area can shape the lives of the people within that culture. She argues that the current monoculture of the developed world is money — or more broadly the worth of things and actions.

Michaels outlines her argument around these key areas: work, relationship with others, relationships with the world, education, physical health, mental health, communities, and creativity. Against each of these areas of the human condition she tests her thesis.

A monoculture, as it is unwritten, doesn't mean the same thing for everyone. It doesn't turn people into sheep or lemmings, but it can affect lives through government policies and personal choices. Enlightenment, though, can help a person or an entire community break free from the invisible, assumed bonds of the monoculture.

It's a short, quick and fascinating book. I've since passed along my review copy to my friends to read.

I received a copy from the author for review.

[Greg · Rating 5 out of 5]

Won this on First Reads Giveaway. I can't wait for its arrival.

Great book that really makes you think about the forces that shape thoughts and culture. The way economics permeates all aspects of modern life and shapes the discussion and reality is a sobering thought. The book is well researched, well written, and accessible to a wide range of readers. At only 130 pages people can fly through this book and then come back and spend some time in the details. My only complaint is about the simplicity of the argument; there are many forces that shape culture. There was a Pollyannaish or romantic quality to some of the assertions of past culture where ideals such as art were elevated to a position beyond influence of outside influences. But even with the minor counterpoints this is well worth a read.

[Bimbo · Rating 2 out of 5]

Popolnoma se strinjam z enim od komentarjev, ki pravi, da si osnovna ideja oziroma teza zasluži petico, izvedba pa je komaj zadovoljiva.

Z vseh vetrov napaberkovane bolj ali manj tehtne misli so zlepljene z ne najbolj izrazitim in prepričljivim avtoričinim vezivom. To pušča vtis ideološko obarvane reciklaže oziroma skrpanke, kar pa je v navzkrižju z osnovno poanto, ki je proti monokulturi, eni vsemogočni zgodbi, vseobsegajoči ideologiji.

Ta idejno zelo zanimiv in aktualen pamflet ima skoraj 200 sklicev na bibliografijo, ki zavzame dobro četrtino strani, v kateri so mnogi opisi podvojeni ali celo potrojeni, kar sicer nima nobenega smisla, ima pa verjetno oprijemljiv razlog.

Knjiga človeku res daje misliti, vendar sem se ob njej vprašal, ali so tisti, katerim bi jo najbolj priporočal, sploh zmožni dojeti tezo in sprejeti podano argumentacijo.

[Matthias De Vriendt · Rating 4 out of 5]

The idea presented in this book is simple, interesting and inspiring. The narrative however, feels utterly dull. It completely failed to mesmerize me... Until I was about halfway, then it unexpectedly begun to draw me in.

It has source references, which I find a major plus for this kind of book - In fact, a necessity to be credible.

It feels a bit too rational being a book about stories. Other books have told a very similar story much in a more interesting way. Yet, being so rational as it is, it does clarify things a bit more.

Seems to reach an unexpected depth, even though it's short and effective. I *almost* shed a tear reading through the last two chapters.

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein. I figure F.S. Michaels knew what she was talking about. However, I doubt she'd be much fun to hang around with.

[Krishaan Khubchand · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reviewing this book one year after reading it and I’ll be updating my rating from 5* to 3. Maybe I’ve just bought into the monoculture 🤷‍♂️

Michaels deals with some pertinent issues, like the inadequacy of GDP and other metrics of growth for measuring actual improvement. She also mentions my pet problem: value capture driven consumer economies which fail to get basic shit right. When it comes to these issues, we’re like fish in water. It’s everywhere, but we look right through it.

With that being said, the rest of the book has a lot of rhetorically nice moralising without much reasoning, nor substance attached to it. She criticises non zero sum partnerships because individuals are still seeking their own interests. She romanticises living in the same community and town for 50+ years; why?

Interesting book nonetheless and I’m glad I read it.

[Neil · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an entirely worthwhile book to read because the central premise of it is so right and so powerful. However, as another reviewer has pointed out, the writing is weak and the way the author has structured his argument could have been much more powerful. The main reason to read this book, though, is to grasp the concept of a monoculture and recognize that we exist within one here in the United States. People who travel to other countries and cultures will recognize this reality very readily. I think the description of the monoculture in the United States put forth by Michaels is incomplete though. The thesis posited here should be further explored and more work should be done in this area.

[Melanie · Rating 4 out of 5]

A book that challenges us to look at the story we're living in now: an economic one. How does the story of economics change everything in our lives into transactional relationships? That's the main takeaway for me. Think about the way you think -- should everything be evaluated by its potential economic value -- it's a good read to wake you up a bit.

While I agree with some other reviewers that the writing style is a little flat and simply done, I think that could also be a strength, in allowing this book to reach readers who might not otherwise be willing to read a cogently argued diatribe against capitalism, in so many words.

Full review here.

[Kyle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very surprising and perhaps life-changing book that tells how the one story has changed the world in little over a century. That one story gets hammered in the six middle chapters, but perhaps it is the blunt force that needs to hit us while hitting the nail on its head. We shouldn't feel sore or boxed in - we basically did all this to ourselves each time we took out our wallet or cheque book - by the economically-minded coffin-makers. It is really just one of the many parallel stories we can accept, like death and taxes.

[Rachel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book - much food for thought. Highly recommended and I'm glad I have a copy to refer back to.