Chuck Klosterman and Philosophy: The Real and the Cereal

Popular Culture and Philosophy #65

by Seth Vannatta (Editor)

Since he burst on the world with his heavy-metal memoir Fargo Rock City in 2001, Chuck Klosterman has been one of the most successful novelists and essayists in America. His collections of essays Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs and Chuck Klosterman A Decade of Curious People and Dangerous Ideas have established Klosterman not only as a credible spokesman for intelligent purveyors of popular culture. His writings and regular columns (in Spin , Esquire , The New York Times Magazine and other venues) about music, sports, and modern culture have sometimes become themselves touchstones in popular culture. The success of his card-based game 50 Questions for Insane Conversations has demonstrated that Klosterman can connect with his fans and readers even off the printed page.

As he writes in his contribution to this book, Klosterman “enjoys writing about big, unwieldy ideas” as they circulate in culture, in people, in music, and in sports. The twenty-two other philosophers writing alongside Klosterman couldn’t agree more. They offer their own take on the concepts and puzzles that fascinate him and take up many of Chuck’s various challenges to answer brain-twisting "hypertheticals" or classic ethical quandaries that would arise if, say, Aristotle wandered backstage at a Kiss concert.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Cultural

288 pages, Paperback

First published April 10, 2012

Reviews

[Arielle · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is both a complete bastardization of philosophy and a strange worshipping of Chuck Klosterman who, despite being one of the preeminent pop culture critics of our time, does not deserve this kind of star treatment (which he fully acknowledges in the epilogue, the only part of the book that he wrote). The connections that the essayists make between the philosophical theories and Chuck's earlier writing are tangential at best. I also wish there had been a bit more vetting of the content because they all reference the same damn things. If I had to hear more one time about how every woman wants to marry John Cusack because of Say Anything I would have had to poke out my eyeballs just to make it stop. I don't recall which of the essayists had the idea for this book, but needless to say the obsession with Chuck Klosterman is absurd and maybe borderline a little Single White Female.

[Parker Avrile · Rating 5 out of 5]

I still don't know how I got this book but I'm glad I did. Two things-- do NOT start this before you read Downtown Owl. It doesn't matter whether or not you've read the nonfics as long as you've listened to a lot of music & know who John Cusack is and have some interest in the concept of un/irony. But Owl is a novel best appreciated without the enthusiastic spoilers included in one of the early essays. Some of the philosophy is technical and above my head, but there's a lot of good lines & concepts & that's all I ask of this kind of book.

[Tyler Shinnick · Rating 2 out of 5]

Rather than wrestling with the philosophical issues in Klosterman's books, these essays either attempt to reconstruct Klosterman's arguments into something new, or they simply used his work as a springboard to drop philosophers' names. Some essays were entirely boring and difficult to read, but there were a few that captured my interest.

[Evan Timberlake · Rating 2 out of 5]

As Klosterman predicted in the epilogue to this book, I bought this pretty much only because it had my favorite author's name on it, despite it actually being about something I care very little for, namely heavy philosophy of mind. There were enough interesting insights in it to make it worthwhile (the brilliant response to the dream-tv hyperthetical, the amusing idea of tribute bands being four levels removed from true form in Plato's canon), but mostly it was just a variety of modern-day philosophers taking Chuck Klosterman's pop culture critiques vastly more seriously than he could have possibly anticipated. There's only so many times you can read a meticulous, overwrought takedown of Chuck's essay on John Cusack influencing the perception of love. I probably won't take too much from this book in the long run, with one caveat: I assumed that philosophy was about as unprofitable a career as someone could realistically enter; apparently modern philosophers can at least make money by writing books about other people writing books about other people. So there's that.

[Stevie · Rating 4 out of 5]

The whatever and philosophy being the only philosophy books that seem to be at the local bookstore, I have seen them many times and always assumed they were silly or the whatever never interested me enough to care to read one. But I received this one and greatly enjoyed reading essays about one of my favorite authors writing. I am not sure it has changed my mind about the whatever and philosophy books but I still love Chuck Klosterman!

[Greg · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very insightful read, especially the essay about Media Ecology

[Benoit Lelièvre · Rating 2 out of 5]

I feel terrible for disliking this book.

Because I wanted to find other people who enjoy Chuck Klosterman's work as much as I do and not feel so Misery Chastain-ish when I try to explain it to other people.

While I'm not qualified to tell you whether the analysis in these essays is bad, I can tell you that Chuck Klosterman is accessory to it, though. It's a hopelessly academic volume that little to do with who Klosterman is and more with the philosophical lineage the contributors think he should be a part of. Here's a list of problems I have with this book.

- A philosopher is someone who developed a thinking system to understand the world. I don't think it's what Klosterman is doing and this book sure doesn't attempt to map one.

- Two thirds of the essays are about "This is Emo", the first piece in Sex, Drugs & Cocoa Puffs and usually the first piece by Klosterman everyone reads.

- Sex, Drugs & Cocoa Puffs is not his best or most meaningful work. Everything starting from Eating the Dinosaur is (I believe).

- The piece by Sybil Priebe is humorously trying to map out a Chuck Klosterman religion, which is the closest to what I believe this book should accomplish, but I don't think Klosterman takes anything religiously. That's what makes him so pertinent.

- The majority of contributors seem interested in pointing out where he went wrong or to position himself in regard to his work instead of discussing it.

I could go on.

Anyway. If you persevere and make it to the epilogue, Klosterman himself says as gracefully as possible: "Well, thanks for that guys. But that didn't quite work out, didn't it?"

That says more than I can possibly say about the book. Not a mandatory read for Klosterman enthusiast. At all.