دنیا تا دیروز

by Jared Diamond, علی مجتهدزاده

کتابی هوشمندانه و چالش‌برانگیز که نویسنده‌اش‌ با گسترة دانش خود در 9 عرصة مختلف پیش روی ما گشوده و از جنگ و صلح، جوانی و پیری، خطر و واکنش، دین، زبان و سلامتی بشر در 39 جامعة ابتدایی می‌گوید. روایت علمی مهیج و گیرایی که سطر به سطر خواننده را به وجد می‌آورد.
مینیاپولیس تریبیون
کتابی ارزشمند، علمی و دقیق که درس‌های زیادی برای آموختن دارد و به‌خوبی نشان می‌دهد که رگ و ریشة همه ما از کجاست و گذشتگان ما چگونه می‌زیسته‌اند.
کریسچن ساینس مانیتور
دایموند با انبارة فرهنگ‌نامه‌وارِ ذهن سرشارش، از همة عرصه‌های زندگی سنتی می‌گوید. از مردم‌شناسی، جامعه‌شناسی، زبان‌شناسی، بهداشت و از زیست‌شناسیِ فرگشتی. او بی‌شک دانشمندی رنسانسی و پژوهشگری جدی است که داده‌ها و نظریات را به‌خوبی در قالب نمونة تحقیقی‌اش هضم می‌کند.
شیکاگو تریبیون
یک اثر تحسین‌برانگیز فاضلانه و اصیل که رگ و پی زندگی شهریِ امروزی ما را به ریشه‌های فلاحتیِ زندگی دیروز پیوند می‌دهد.

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Anthropology, Science, Sociology, Politics, Cultural

512 pages

First published October 19, 2012

About the author

Jared Mason Diamond is an American scientist, historian, and author best known for his popular science and history books and articles. Originally trained in biochemistry and physiology, Diamond is commonly referred to as a polymath, stemming from his knowledge in many fields including anthropology, ecology, geography, and evolutionary biology. He is a professor of geography at UCLA.

In 2005, Diamond was ranked ninth on a poll by Prospect and Foreign Policy of the world's top 100 public intellectuals.

Reviews

[Petra X · Rating 5 out of 5]

Book of the year, 2013, for me. 7 pure gold, very twinkly, high-in-the-sky stars. If you like anthropology and history you'll like this. If you don't think you like those subjects, you might still like this because it is wonderfully well-written and very enlightening.

If I ever get round to reviewing again, ie. if I ever get over being pissed off at Goodreads for turning into an authors' marketplace, for deleting and censoring reviews and shelves, for sharing my reviews, all of them, with Google when I denied permission, then this will be one of the first books I will review.

[Seth Kolloen · Rating 2 out of 5]

Extremely disappointing. There are a few interesting chapters, but I probably skimmed about 60% of the book. There is a lot of long-winded explanation of things that any high school student probably knows (languages are disappearing - people are fat - religious people sometimes go to war!) The last third especially just seems like Diamond spouting off about nutrition and education with very little tied back to the supposed theme of the book. Really felt like about a 60 page book that was just expanded to make it marketable. Honestly, I feel like I was ripped off.

[David · Rating 2 out of 5]

You need to know right up front that I am going to really rag on this book. I read every single word of it and feel qualified to tell you it was poor in many respects. It would be so much nicer to praise and compliment Diamond's efforts here but I'd be lying if I told you anything other than "this was a painful experience". If you stick with my review, however, I will tell you toward the end what it takes this author 466 pages to say. (Please don't expect anything revelatory. His conclusions are the very definition of mundane.)

In summary there are some interesting ideas presented in a style that is excessively wordy. Actually he vomits onto the page incessantly. And it's incredibly frustrating because syntax and grammar are generally not his problems. (He does use "regime" when he means "regimen" and wrongly differentiates between Parasitic and Infectious Diseases, but these are minor quibbles.) He simply can't help himself from droning on and on with the result that he is pedantic.

And the repetition is stultifying. Here is just one example:

"In each such case, as I detailed two paragraphs above for Alaska's Inuit, the coastal partner has preferential or sole access to marine or coastal resources such as marine mammals and fish and shells, while the inland partner has preferential or sole access to territorial resources such as game, gardens and forests."

He recognizes that he just said this. So he has to tell us that he just said this. And then he has to say it all over again in his formulaic, textbook fashion. How did this man ever win a Pulitzer Prize?

Many of his ideas are already well-established or so obvious as to be rather anticlimactic. And yet Diamond seems not to understand that. Even the most basic principles are identified and explained (and illustrated) for his reader. Check out this beaut on page 61:

"The first surprise for the Highlanders would have been to discover that our overwhelmingly prevalent method of acquiring an item is not by barter but by paying for it with money (Plate 33)." Turn to plate 33 which is a photograph of a white guy using cash to buy a gallon of paint at the counter of a hardware store. Good Lord...

Other problems include a shifting perspective in favor of third-world views which undermines objectivity. The section titled "Advantages of the Modern World" lists the many reasons members of traditional societies (Aboriginal Pygmies, New Guinea Highlanders, Amazonian Hunters) give for wanting to adopt First World lifestyles; the section titled "Advantages of the Traditional World" lists the many terrible things these same individuals find upon moving to the U.S. Really? These are quite clearly Disadvantages of the Modern World. Why not just say so?

Drum roll, please. Here is what we can all learn from traditional societies:

Do not smoke.
Exercise regularly.
Limit your intake of total calories, alcohol, salt, sugar, saturated fats and processed foods.
Increase your intake of fiber, fruits, vegetables and calcium.
Eat more slowly.
Decrease sedentary activities, especially screen time, unless it comes to meals which should be social/communal and relaxed.

Following this summation, Diamond writes: "This advice is so banally familiar that it's embarassing to repeat it." Yes, it most certainly is.

Do yourself a favor and don't cause further embarrassment by reading every word of this book like I did. We must all learn from one another's mistakes.

[Marc Lamot · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reading this book I remembered why I liked Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies so much: the clear line of argument, the logical structure, the transparency about sources and methodology, etc., all these criteria of a sound scientific work, they came back in this book, or at least partly.

This book has been applauded, but also highly criticized, especially because Diamond relied mainly on his own experiences (in Papua New Guinea) and on some other studies of traditional societies elsewhere, and apparently had made completely wrong estimates of the available data, for example in comparing the level of violence in traditional and modern societies. I can understand both critiques: a number of chapters indeed mainly are based on personal experiences, and, of course, Diamond not has been able to read all anthropological literature. But he is always very honest about that, and he constantly warns against generalizations or indicates that his source material is rather limited.

The second point of criticism is bit more difficult to evaluate. I have the impression that in most cases the comparisons Diamond makes between the levels of violence in traditional and modern societies are sound. But it is right that he remains blind to the ravages that the advent of modernity has wrought among native populations. He does point out that these societies were themselves pacified, because the modern states had taken over the monopoly on violence, but then does not mention the violence and discrimination of those modern states themselves against their native population (in Australia, Indonesia, Brazil, etc.), and that's certainly an obvious mistake.

Contrary to what some reviewers write, Diamond does not go along with the classic praise to the “noble savage”. He clearly highlights the disadvantages of life in traditional societies. That said, he also points out some positive aspects that we, modern Westerners, might well learn from. Rightly so. But if you see the list of his conclusions, you may be disappointed: they are very predictable. We should live healthier, exercise more, and eat more nutritiously, take better care of our elderly, better educate our children about the past, and in our legal system we should be more mindful of mediation and compensation. It are all things that our newspapers already are full of.

Yet there are two aspects that Diamond introduces that were new and interesting to me: the principle of constructive paranoia, and the contribution of emotional aspects to conflicts. Constructive paranoia refers to the attitude of traditional societies to continuously assess dangers and risks and take them into account in their behavior; a strong contrast is that with consciously looking up (and kicking on) risks in our western societies. And in conflict resolution traditional societies especially focus on the restoration of relations between the conflicting parties, and the manifest emotional input therein.

Personally I enjoyed the concrete stories that Diamond tells about his experiences during his many stays in New Guinea. Of course, they give a distorted picture, and you should certainly not generalize them, but they make the picture of life in a traditional society much more tangible. It is a pity that he mainly discusses these experiences in the first part (about conflicts) and the second part (about dealing with young and old), and much less in the others.

My biggest criticism of this book is that it has no clear focus. For example, in the last chapter we are presented with dozens of pages about what salt and sugar do to our health and how dangerous high blood pressure and obesity are, including guidelines for a healthier diet. Certainly as the book progresses, the emphasis is much less on how things are (or were) in traditional societies than on how in the modern West we do things wrongly. In that respect, the quality of this book is clearly less than its more well-known Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies.

[Milton Soong · Rating 4 out of 5]

Four stars for content, 3 stars for style.

This is from the author of Guns, Germs, and Steel. I liked that book for the content and insight it presented, but thought that it's too verbose (i.e. lots of repetition of the same idea to get the point across). This book suffers the same issue. Ideally the information can be presented via a series of long form magazine article instead of a tome, but I guess books makes more money..

One difference about this book to his previous is that this work is a combination of history and advocacy. He presents how traditional societies (mostly represented by tribesmen of New Guinea which he is very familiar with, with sprinking of examples from other native tribes of America and Africa thrown in) differs from ours. The advocacy part then kicks in on what the author think we can learn from these societies. Some folks doesn't like to get preached to when they read history so YMMV.

Some highlights:

- One should not romanticize traditional society, life is harsh. Childhood mortality rate is as high as 2/3. Few lives beyond 40 years old.
- Binary world view: People you meet are either people you know (kin and family of the same tribe), or they are enemy. A stranger is by definition an enemy (because he is a threat and competitor to your food source).
- Agriculture is the dividing line: Traditional society = hunter gatherer. Once agriculture is discovered that society will head toward what we call "modern civilization".
- One is constantly in a state of war. Violence can erupt anytime. Death rate percentage wise is much higher than modern warfare like WW1/WW2.
- One is immersed with ones tribesmen. People are constantly talking and communicating. Privacy is unknown (adults will be having sex in the same room as their children).
- Children discover sex much earlier than modern folks. Childhood games often have sexual overtone.
- There are no law. Cultural custom rules the land (the author has a interesting story about a modern driver who had a hit and run incident and killed a child. Rule number one is after a hit and run you should immediately flee the scene and visit the local police, else the victims family and tribe is likely to lynch you on the spot).
- All disputes are resolved via arbitration (remember, no law). So a hit and run wrongful death incident will involve you sending out emissary to reps of the victim to work out a "deal".
- Concept of Justice in this case is very different. The result of dispute resolution is not to establish right and wrong, but to come up with a "deal" so that relationship can be restored to a status quo ante. This is important because any disputes are likely with people close to you (i.e. neighboring tribes) that you will have to deal with later in life. The concept in our world of disputes/crime with strangers doesn't really exist for them.
This is one part of the custom that the author is advocating for disputes among people you know (i.e. divorce, or inheritance fights) because one want to preserve relationship afterwards. An adversarial court preceding is a bad way to resolve these issues.
- Even if such a "deal" is reach among the principals, it doesn't mean it's settled. A victim's uncle might decide that the deal was not satisfactory, so you then have a blood feud on your hand. You might get an arrow 2 years from now because of this.
- Dangers abound, so folks are paranoid by our standard.
- They are much healthier in terms of diseases like heart disease, diabetes, obesity, etc.
- They are much less healthy in terms of infection, epidemics, etc.
- They are physically active by our standard.
- Paleo diet works if you want to lose weight.
- (late addition) Being a crib bilingual means the person will grow up and handle change better. There are some fascinating experiments outlined in the book to prove this with babies...

[Sense of History]

I am always angered by scientists and pseudo-scientists who take it for granted that the study of 'primitive' societies of today, or of several decades ago, provides a good insight into the life of the hunter-gatherers of 100,000 years ago, when the human species only consisted of that kind of people. It is a mistake that is very often made to see these 'primitive' societies as a kind of living fossiles, reflecting almost perfectly the life of so many years ago. This view ignores the fact that these societies kept on evolving on their own, and immediately adapted their way of life, even after the faintest contact with western people.

I am not claiming that Diamond is committing the same mistake, at least not systematically, but several passages in this book implicitly take the faulty point of view for granted. Take the main title of this book, "the world until yesterday": even though 'yesterday' is not to be taken literally, this is absolutely wrong. In that respect, the subtitle: "What we can learn from traditional societies" covers the content much better. Because Diamond rightly points out that the classical social sciences give a completely distorted view of human reality: they only focus on people in the 'Weird' societies (Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic), and often only the US. He’s absolutely right that traditional societies must be seen as much more diverse experiments in human society and thus provide a broader and more accurate picture of what mankind really is. Seen from that angle, and despite its shortcomings, this is a valuable book that develops a number of creditable hypotheses. And fortunately, Diamond uses the term ‘traditional communities’ and not the odious ‘primitive’.

[William2]

I agree with David Brooks who reviewed this book in January 2013 that much of its essential idea— that the West can learn from traditional and small-scale societies—doesn’t really leap off the page. Brooks’s point is that the reader doesn’t really get to meet individuals of traditional and primitive societies, and that undermines Diamond’s arguments that the West try alternatives to its present justice system. One idea that I Iiked was emotional mediation in some cases of murder. Here the killer and his victims are brought together to face each other over a table and talk about how the loss of a loved has affected them or, in the case of the killer, a show of remorse. This may seem preposterous on its face, but for those so inclined such an approach can provide closure for the parties that most present Western systems of justice cannot, since parties in Western disputes tend to talk at each other through adversarial intermediaries called attorneys. I can also see why Diamond sticks to discussing traditional and small-scale societies from the perspective of populations, since a divagation to an individual’s story might skew his arguments unduly. Having said that I also see how the populations approach appears inherently anti-individualistic and even Marxist. Marxist intrusions into the social and behavioral sciences in the second half of the 20th century were horrendously counterproductive, but I do not believe that is the author’s intent here. Nevertheless, the lack of human stories makes for rough sledding. There are some, but very few. So a bit of a narrative Catch-22.

[Aaron Thibeault · Rating 5 out of 5]

*A full executive summary of this book is available here: http://newbooksinbrief.com/2013/01/15...

The main argument: The onset of agriculture and farming some 11,000 years ago (termed the Neolithic Revolution), is arguably the most significant turning point in the history of our species. Agriculture induced a major population explosion, which then led to urbanization; labor specialization; social stratification; and formalized governance—thus ultimately bringing us to civilization as we know it today. Prior to the Neolithic Revolution—and extending back time out of mind—human beings lived in a far different way. Specifically, our ancestors lived in small, largely egalitarian tribes of no more than 50 to 100 individuals, and hunted and foraged for their food.

The transition from our traditional hunting and gathering lifestyle, to early farming (and herding), to civilization as we know it now (which, on an evolutionary time-scale, occurred but yesterday) has certainly brought with it some very impressive benefits. Indeed, many of us today enjoy comforts and opportunities the likes of which our more traditional ancestors would never have dreamed of. However, it cannot be said that the transition from traditional to modern has left us without any difficulties. Indeed, some would go so far as to say that the problems that civilization has introduced outweigh the benefits that it has brought; and even the most unromantic among us are likely to agree that our experiment in civilization has not been an unmitigated success.

This then brings us to the problem of solving the difficulties that civilization has left us with. Now, when it comes to solving our problems, it is without a doubt the spirit of our age to look ever forward for solutions—by which I mean we tend to look for new technologies and hitherto untested arrangements to help us out of our current predicaments. However, when we consider that our traditional lifestyle served us well for millennia on end, and that it was under this lifestyle wherein we underwent much of the biological and psychological evolution that lives with us to this day, we can begin to see how it may be fruitful to look back at this traditional lifestyle for possible solutions to the problems we now face. (This idea is not new; indeed, the ‘state of nature’ has traditionally been of great interest to philosophers—for it has been thought that understanding how we lived by nature may serve as a guide to help us design the most fitting political communities given our present circumstances).

Also of interest here—and deeply connected to the more practical goal mentioned above—is that investigating our traditional way of life promises to shed light on our underlying human nature in a way that is not possible when we look at ourselves through the obscuring artifice of civilization. It is these things that we stand to gain by learning about traditional societies, and it is this very project that geographer Jared Diamond takes up in his new book The World Until Yesterday: What Can We Learn from Traditional Societies?

Diamond is certainly not one to deny that civilization has brought with it many important benefits over our traditional way of life (the most important of which, according to the author, being that state governments are much more effective at ending the cycles of violence that tend to plague traditional societies). However, Diamond does contend that there are many areas wherein traditional practices represent an improvement over how we do things in the modern world, and that these practices could (and should) be incorporated into our modern way of life (both at the personal and societal level). Specifically, we could afford to learn a thing or two from traditional societies when it comes to conflict resolution (how to re-establish and mend relationships); raising children (that it really does take a whole village to raise a child); treating the elderly (that they are deserving of respect, and are still capable of contributing to the community in many important ways); approaching risk (with extensive caution); communicating (in a face to face way, and with multiple languages); and in diet and exercise (favoring natural foods, reducing salt, and sugar intake, and adopting a more active lifestyle).

In the course of his exploration of traditional societies, Diamond also delves into why and how our ancestors transitioned from traditional societies to civilizations (with a focus on such areas as social, economic and political stratification, and also religion).

Diamond has made a career out of studying the traditional societies of Papua New Guinea, and is therefore a very credible authority on the subject matter at hand. What's more, his wealth of experience has left him with a trove of interesting and illuminating anecdotes to draw from, and these are on full display here. Finally, I felt that the author always maintained a very sober and balanced view with regards to the benefits and drawbacks of both traditional and modern societies. I would have liked to have seen certain topics discussed more, and others less, but this is mere personal preference. Altogether a very good book. A full executive summary of this book is available here: http://newbooksinbrief.com/2013/01/15... A podcast discussion of the book is also available.

[Bettie · Rating 3 out of 5]

BOTW

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01r...

BBC Blurbs: Drawing upon several decades of experience living and working in Papua New Guinea, Professor Diamond shows how traditional societies can offer an extraordinary window into how our ancestors lived for millions of years - until virtually yesterday, in evolutionary terms - and provide unique, often overlooked insights into human nature. Exploring how tribal peoples approach essential human problems, from child rearing to old age to conflict resolution to health, Diamond reminds us that the West achieved global dominance due to specific environmental and technological advantages, but Westerners do not necessarily have superior ideas about how to live well.

5* Guns, Germs and Steel
5* Collapse
4* The Third Chimpanzee
1* Why is Sex Fun
3* The World Until Yesterday

[David Rubenstein · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a fascinating, comprehensive view of life in several traditional cultures. The best part of the book is the personal insights that Jared Diamond delivers. Diamond spent a lot of time with the peoples of Papua New Guinea, and he enthusiastically describes all facets of their lives. He contrasts their society with other traditional societies living in the Arctic, in Africa, and with modern, Western societies.

There are hundreds of "tribes" living in New Guinea. Many of these tribes have long-standing enmities with their neighbors. It is very dangerous for people to move from one area to another, because of vendettas that span across generations. Many people have never traveled more than a few miles from the place where they were born. Some people who live within 50 or 100 miles of the coast are not even aware of the ocean. As a result, their languages and customs remain distinct from one another.

This is a wonderful book, because Diamond describes the societies from first-hand knowledge, living among people in New Guinea. He has many interesting stories to tell, including a number from his first-hand experiences there. I especially like the story about his bird-watching expedition into an isolated region by helicopter, over 20 miles from the nearest inhabitants. All went swimmingly, until he came to a small clearing, where a guide pointed out a small stick with a few leaves stuck in the ground. Such an innocuous object was alarming to the guide, as it implied that the territory had recently been visited--and perhaps claimed--by others.

The book does tend to repeat unnecessarily, and occasionally to ramble. Towards the end of the book, Diamond makes a point of showing how the diets of traditional societies may be healthier than Western diets. People in traditional societies rarely are overweight, get diabetes, heart disease, and so on. This is an excellent point, although Diamond turns the chapter into a sort of self-help manual. I enjoyed his emphasis, but it was sort of distracting.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's always exciting when Jared Diamond publishes a new book and the advance copies were hugely sought after when they arrived at the office in October. This is the most personal of Diamond's books, with many anecdotes from his work in New Guinea. It reads like the book he's always wanted to write. The title is a comment that, in the context of history, we all, until recently, lived in traditional societies and Diamond describes key elements of that lifestyle. I found the beginning, where Diamond compares and contrasts traditional and modern societies, especially with reference to the execution of justice, forced. But the explicit drawing of lessons from traditional societies soon ends, leaving the reader to draw their own conclusions, and from here the book is an excellent and flowing read. Diamond effortlessly discusses, among other things, childhood, safety, religion, and language, describing how every society's structures are responses to particular contexts. He ends with observations about the fate of traditional societies today which points to where we ourselves may be heading. The World Until Yesterday is the natural extension of Guns, Germs, and Steel and Collapse as a masterly commentary on humanity and society.

I'm on Twitter: @Dr_A_Taubman

[Aaron Arnold · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a frustrating book to review. It touches on a lot of interesting subjects, but avoids discussing many of the most thought-provoking implications. It has sections of research picked almost randomly in support of alternately prudent and ridiculous opinions. It's heavy on analysis, yet it doesn't have many clear prescriptions at all. Its subject is vast, yet his focus is often very narrow. I liked many parts of it, but overall it's unquestionably a step down from his past 2, even though it clearly seems to be a more heartfelt book. In the grand continuum of popular science books, it's much closer to the "pop" end, and even given the fact that it's impossible to satisfy all types of popular science readers, I have no idea who the target audience is supposed to be. His subject is the cultural practices of several groups of traditional societies, and the lessons that us Westerners can learn from their practices. In a way it's a return to the first chapter of Guns Germs & Steel, but instead of asking "how did the West get so advanced?", he's asking "are there things we can still learn from the people we've out-developed?"

It's a reasonable question, and anyone who has devoted any thought to the long-term effects of our overweight, overstressed, overmedicated, atomized modern lifestyles ("WEIRD" in his acronym - Western Educated Industrial Rich Democratic) will find some value in his high-level survey of the ways that traditional societies handle various aspects of the human condition like conflict, child-raising, religion, diet, the role of the elderly, and the like. He tends to split his analysis into either anecdote-heavy descriptive passages that involve his pals in New Guinea, or slightly more rigorous conceptual sections that discuss things like the various functions of religion or the types of political changes that occur when societies grow from a few hundred hunter-gatherers to millions of specialized citizens. There's good stuff in both types of sections, but... (as usual, ignore the first half of any sentence that has a "but..." in it).

My problem with the anecdotal sections is that though the narrative format is a good way to make your points more vivid, it's also a good way to make them less rigorous. It's all very well to tell people that "constructive paranoia" (minimizing risks through careful skepticism) is a helpful way to live, but even though he has some neat stories about mysterious forest sorcerers, almost dying in a canoe accident, and running around on remote mountain peaks, my reaction was basically "cool story bro" - are these either generalizable in any way to Western lives, or even anything more than an over-elaborate way to say "watch out for danger"? He also tosses in anecdotes that are simply absurd, like the one about the Kenyan who didn't like American toys because Kenyan toys were more interactive and better at encouraging mechanical creativity. Hence the global leadership and supremacy of Kenyan industry? Ditto again for stories about how much more isolating modern society is than than the constant communication and contact in traditional societies. This is certainly true, but it seems odd to package a criticism of solitary entertainment like TV, video games, or books in the form of a book which can only be appreciated by reading or listening to it alone.

As far as the more data-heavy sections are concerned, I don't think any of the science is outright wrong, but I can see why this book annoys specialists in several scientific fields. Diamond picks really big topics, like The Role of Religion In Society, or The Effects of Increasing Scale On Societal Organization, and sums them up in a few pages of text and maybe a table or two. This is either admirable trans-specialty synthesis, or over-simplification on an epic scale, and the trend was increasingly towards the latter as the book went on. For example, late in the book he talks about the sharp decrease in global language diversity and the disappearance of many traditional languages. I personally am not very sentimental about languages in and of themselves, even English, and so his pathos-filled arguments for the preservation and continuation of languages with just a few thousand speakers didn't do much for me. Suppressing speakers of Breton is bad, I agree, and I think his advocacy of bilingualism is solid, yet the fact that all languages eventually change or die out doesn't really bother me in a metaphysical sense; that my nth generation descendants might be speaking SpaceMandarin instead of NeoEnglish is fine with me. Also, Diamond correctly points out that death rates from all kinds are much higher in traditional societies than modern ones: are there any evolutionary consequences to this? He doesn't say.

Ultimately I wasn't very satisfied with the book. Certainly we should give more thought to whether the vast changes in lifestyle encouraged by modernity are really good for us in the long run, but I found the evidence that Diamond gave insufficient to conclude that New Guinean highlanders have much to teach us. What made Guns Germs & Steel and Collapse such good books to me was their rigorous sourcing, his broad synthesis of those sources, and the careful way his specific claims about imperialism and sustainability emerged from those things. This book is a decent overview of the cultural practices of some groups of traditional societies, but it feels like a huge let-down from those two works, simultaneously too lengthy and too unclear.

Also, the airport frame story technique was almost intolerably Thomas Friedman-esque. Cut that stuff out.

[Tuyet Lan · Rating 1 out of 5]

Chiến lược đọc từ cuốn ít tiếng tăm nhất đến cuốn nổi nhất của Jared Dimond đã thất bại một nửa. Háo hức mua và lập kế hoạch đọc xong bộ 4 cuốn được quảng cáo là "lịch sử nhân loại" của Jared từ hè năm 2020. Mất 2 tháng cho cuốn Biến động, và đến giờ - hết quý I 2021 mới lết được xong cuốn thứ 2 @.@

Những điều làm mình thất vọng về cuốn sách này rất là nhiều! Trước hết là mình kỳ vọng tính lịch sử nhiều hơn từ sách. Nhưng hóa ra sách lại là nghiên cứu nhân học - so sánh giữa các nhóm dân cư (bộ lạc công xã với xã hội có nhà nước, cư trú ở rừng rậm với sống ở đô thị). Tác giả dành hầu hết thời gian để liệt kê sự khác biệt giữa ứng xử và cách nghĩ của một xã hội kiểu bộ lạc (ở New Guine là chủ yếu) với xã hội tổ chức nhà nước hiện đại về cùng một vấn đề; đưa ra các lí giải về sự khác biệt đó. Vấn đề là những bộ lạc được mô tả lại vô danh quá - việc bộ lạc ấy chiến tranh để bảo vệ lợn gà, trả thù cho họ hàng chẳng gợi cho mình chút hấp dẫn nào.

Điều thất vọng thứ hai sự lê thê của lời văn. Không biết đặc điểm của các nghiên cứu nhân học có phải là mô tả dài dòng không. Nhưng mà nửa đầu cuốn sách khiến mình thực sự mệt nhoài. Phần sau thì thú vị hơn, không phải vì tác giả bớt kể lể, mà là chủ đề so sánh đáng quan tâm hơn (Phần đầu là so sánh về chiến tranh, phân biệt ta-địch, ứng phó với hiểm nguy; phần sau là nuôi dạy trẻ em, đối xử với người già, tôn giáo và sức khỏe).

Và điều này dẫn đến thất vọng tiếp theo là sự bất đối xứng của cấu trúc nội dung. Phần so sánh các xã hội "hôm qua" với "hiện đại" lê thê là thế, mà đến lúc cần tổng kết lại thì tác giả lại làm quá qua loa, vội vã. Giống như kiểu viết vội để kịp nộp bài thi vậy. Miệt mài đọc mà rút cục mình chưa được thỏa mãn bởi lí giải của tác giả cho câu hỏi đặt ra ở tiêu đề "Chúng ta học được gì từ những xã hội truyền thống?". Tác giả chỉ dành ra vài trang cuối sách để nói nước đôi: sự khác biệt của 2 hình thái xã hội đó là do ảnh hưởng bởi môi trường và điều kiện sống, không thể nói bên nào ưu việt hơn; con người ở các bộ lạc thì ao ước được cuộc sống an toàn và đủ đầy vật chất như người thành thị; người thành thị thì lại mong quan hệ gia đình khăng khít hơn, hòa đồng và giao lưu với con người, với thiên nhiên như xã hội xưa. Ông nói việc nghiên cứu so sánh các xã hội này khiến ông được "làm giàu thêm" cách nhìn, "học hỏi từ vốn kinh nghiệm to lớn từ người truyền thống", nhưng ông lại chẳng chia sẻ được mấy điều đó với độc giả qua cuốn sách nặng trịch này.

Có thể cuốn sách sẽ hấp dẫn với ai đó thích tìm hiểu các lát cắt văn hóa, hoặc là một tài liệu tham khảo tốt cho sinh viên học ngành nhân học. Nhưng nó là quá mức (quá thiếu và quá thừa) đối với một người không chuyên, đọc để giải trí như mình. Hi vọng là 2 cuốn còn lại của bộ -"Sụp đổ" & "Súng, vi trùng và thép" nổi tiếng hơn thì sẽ hấp dẫn hơn!

[Jenny (Reading Envy) · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this because it looks at several groups from Papua New Guinea while exploring the differences between "modern" and "primitive" societies. Since the author spends 7% of his life in Papua New Guinea, at least half the examples of primitive societies come from that area, and he fills in the concepts with research (his own and others', current and historic) from other traditional societies around the world.

There is a lot here - warfare, language, diet, disease, family units. I was most intrigued by the suggestions in the parenting and elderly chapters for what we might want to consider adopting again because of the benefits to personal and societal health. The economic implications were interesting as well, in fact the author suggests that major mistakes like the Harvard endowment debacle of 2008 may have been stalled if they thought more like Papua New Guinea sweet potato farmers.

As a book on Papua New Guinean culture, this isn't where I would start because it includes bits and pieces in a larger context. I only say that since that is why I included it in my (now) three months of reading books from and about New Guinea. But for a book wide in scope about traditional societies, I doubt you'll find anything better! Just don't be surprised if you find yourself having conversations about breastfeeding while you're in the middle of it. It's really inescapable.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Guns, Germs and Steel" is Dr. Diamond's masterpiece and this book augments what we learned from it. (I haven't read Chimpanzee yet or some of the others.) I love this man for teaching us so well, even though he talks about a part of the world in which I have had no interest. His insights open cracks in my brain that have been sealed with the creosote of intellectual arrogance-- false assumptions. Many of our Goodreads friends have reviewed this book better than I can, and I encourage all to read each review. Perhaps because he has covered this material in other works, I found it a little repetitive and not as revolutionary.

When you look at experience through the eyes of the "primitive" you are looking at life as a child, but a child who is becoming wise. All seekers should read Jared Diamond's whole canon of work.

[Keith Swenson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Consider me a big Jared Diamond fan. I read Guns, Germs, and Steel twice, Collapse once, and have watched all the video documentaries. There is no question that Diamond is a consummate researcher and will always have a special place in helping me understand how human societies have come about.

This book, however, was a vague disappointment. Not because the book was bad, but because I had such high expectations of it. It seemed to me that he had a bunch of notes and journal entries left over that did not fit into the earlier works, and now here they are, jumbled together with an attempt at an overall theme, but more jumble than theme.

What I did find fascinating is the view of the primitive cultures in New Guinea. I personally have no feeling for what these cultures are like, and this book will give you a certain feeling and understanding. Death and murder is a part of everyday life. Particularly poignant is the Inuit who will probably be killed for trespassing, even when the trespassing was completely accidental, caused by ice breaking off and drifting into another tribe's territory. Our modern state-oriented sense of fairness rebels at the idea that both sides know that no fault is assigned, and yet killing has nothing to do with fault. We certainly take it for granted that we can stop the car in any small town in America, get out, and walk around with really a very low chance of any problem. A native New Guinean lives in a 7 mile radius, not because they lack curiosity or stamina to go further, but because it is incredibly dangerous to do so.

Chapter 2 is about accidents and justice, and how restoring relationship is the goal in traditional cultures, while in state societies justice means either punishment or compensation.

Chapter 3 & 4 is about war and violence. He does highlight the differences between traditional cultures and ours.

Chapter 5 is about raising children, while chapter 6 was about how the old are treated. Some hints of a romantic idea that kids are so much better when they have to make their own toys, however infant mortality and accident rates are shockingly high. While it was interesting to see the differences, these chapters did not leave me with any real idea of how we might learn from these.

Chapter 7 was a very very detailed account of a boat accident he endured, and the only point was that someone else, a native, had noticed the crew of the boat was misbehaving and decided not to be on the boat. The point? Some natives have a sense of danger that we westerners don't have. At the same time, we westerners have a sense in our environment of what is and is not dangerous as well. Why would anyone be surprised at this? The real message: people know their own world better than foreigners. Chapter 8 follow this with further interesting stories of native differences.

Chapter 9 launches into a discussion of religion, and this chapter feels as if it was pulled from a completely different book. Clearly he has done a lot of thinking about this, and did not have enough material for a whole book on the subject, so this became chapter 9. Maybe the best chapter, but at the same time, understand that the same kind of hard evidence from the rest of the book is simply not possible on the subject of religion.

Chapter 10 is a shallow argument that everyone should be a polyglot. He explains that there are 7000 languages, and the median language spoken by few thousand people. Surprisingly, in these traditional cultures, there are many languages spoken in a small area, and literally everyone speaks a handful of languages. He gives some evidence that people who a bilingual do better at something things than monolingual people, and this is done with the standard backdrop of how sad it is that so man people in USA are monolingual. This is followed by weaping and moaning for languages that are being "steamrollered" out of existence by modern states. However, he never once gives a reason that the world should have 7000 languages. Most of these languages are only spoken (never written) and he never explains why there is any harm at the loss of a language after the last speaker dies. Similarly, there is no assessment of the value of a common language, although we all know this is incredibly valuable today. This chapter was romantic and quite frankly unconvincing.

Chapter 11 is on diet. Clearly, the modern diet is not healthy, and clearly we have a chronic problem with diabetes today. He gives plenty of evidence that this is a modern world (cultural) problem and not any kind of racial problem: what I mean is that tranditional people when they take up the modern lifestyle fall prey to all these problems equal to those who had many generations in the lifestyle. This is a worthy message, however the problem is complex, and no solution is provided. We know people need to be more active, and traditional cultures are generally more active. So in the end, not much real new insight comes out of this.

That is about it: a few viewpoints of the differences of modern world compared to traditional world, backed up by copious, very detailed notes. Diamond remains one of the most important people to read, but not for this book.

[Tevfik · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jared Diamond'un her kitabı ufkumu fersah fersah açmıştır. Bu de öyle yaptı. Gerçekten insanın dünyaya ve toplumlara olan bakışını değiştirebilen bir yazar. Bir hezarfen olmasının bunda çok büyük etkisi var. Olayları pek çok farklı boyuttan ele alabiliyor.

Düne kadar dünya, günümüzdeki avcı toplayıcı toplulukların bizlerin düne kadarki hallerine karşılık geldiği varsayımıyla, geçmişteki sosyal kurumlarla günümüzdekileri karşılaştırıyor. Her sosyolog, antropolog, kültür ve sanat tarihçisinin okuması, kütüphanesinde bulundurması gereken bir eser diye düşünüyorum.

Yayınevi için de küçük bir notum var: Redaksiyon pek iyiyken son iki bölümde aksıyor. Yer yer unutulmuş kelimeler, anlatım bozuklukları belirmeye başlıyor. Kitabın kalınlığından olsa gerek, redaktör sonlara doğru sıkılmış galiba :)

[Thắng Công · Rating 3 out of 5]

Một cuốn sách 600 trang, đọc đến phát mệt :v nhưng tựu trung lại cũng thấy nhiều điều thú vị. Phần I và phần II nói về mấy hình thức tổ chức xã hội đọc hơi chán, nhưng về sau mấy phần về người già, tôn giáo, và sức khoẻ đọc rất thực tế và hấp dẫn. Không phải chỉ về xã hội truyền thống, tác giả thực sự đã xây dựng nên một bức tranh bao quát về nhiều lĩnh vực với vô vàn thứ đáng học hỏi trong cuộc sống.
Sẵn sàng cho "Sụp đổ" và "Súng, vi trùng và thép" thôi.

[Петър Стойков · Rating 3 out of 5]

Нелоша книжка от автора на иначе отречената от всички историци Пушки, вируси, стомана. Tя е поредната книга с доказателствен материал, разбиващ мита за райския живот на първобитните племена. Знаете ги тия представи - тип Танцуващия с вълци, дето разните му там индианци, туземци и т.н. са благородни, горди и добри и изведнъж идва лошия бял човек да им осере хармонията.

Авторът е прекарал в Нова Гвинея над 30 г. и има добри наблюдения над изобилстващите там племена които са сред последните на Земята да установят някакъв контакт с цивилизацията (последният официално изяден човек там е през 1979 г., а неофициално... не се знае).

Животът в племенните общности е много далече от райски, от хармония и идилия. Непрестанните междуплеменни войни и канибализъм правят насилствената смърт най-честата причина за смърт, "хармонията с природата" е наивна легенда и за 100 г. след идването си в Нова Зеландия аборигените изтребват до крак множество животински видове и изгарят горите и т.н.

Книгата обаче не е толкова всеобхватна колкото заглавието показва и се занимава главно със споменатите новогвинейци.

[Natalie · Rating 4 out of 5]

While THE WORLD UNTIL YESTERDAY isn't exactly captivating reading, it's a book most will have been glad they read. I found the chapters on child rearing, elder care, dispute resolution, risk, and nutrition most informative and while not idealizing traditional societies, the author makes the case that there is, indeed, much we can learn from them.

[Elyse Walters · Rating 2 out of 5]

Disappointing!

[Laura · Rating 3 out of 5]

From BBC Radio 4 - Book of the Week:
The first of five extracts from Pulitzer Prize-winning author Jared Diamond's powerful new book, that asks what can traditional societies teach us about how we in the west live now?

2/5. Second extract from Pulitzer Prize-winning author Jared Diamond's powerful new book that draws upon his several decades of experience living and working in Papua New Guinea. Professor Diamond argues that traditional societies offer a window onto how our ancestors lived for millions of years - until virtually yesterday, in evolutionary terms - and can provide unique, often overlooked insights into human nature.

3/5 Extract from Pulitzer Prize-winning author Jared Diamond's powerful new book that draws upon his several decades of experience living and working in Papua New Guinea. Professor Diamond argues that traditional societies offer a window onto how our ancestors lived for millions of years - until virtually yesterday, in evolutionary terms - and can provide unique, often overlooked insights into human nature.

4/5 Extract from the Pulitzer Prize-winning author Jared Diamond's new book which suggests that traditional societies offer us a window onto how our ancestors lived for millions of years - until virtually yesterday, in evolutionary terms - and can provide unique, often overlooked insights into human nature.

5/5 Extract from Pulitzer Prize-winning author Jared Diamond's powerful new book which suggests that traditional societies offer a window onto how our ancestors lived for millions of years - until virtually yesterday, in evolutionary terms - and can provide unique, often overlooked insights into human nature.

Drawing upon several decades of experience living and working in Papua New Guinea, Professor Diamond shows how traditional societies can offer an extraordinary window into how our ancestors lived for millions of years - until virtually yesterday, in evolutionary terms - and provide unique, often overlooked insights into human nature. Exploring how tribal peoples approach essential human problems, from childrearing to old age to conflict resolution to health, Diamond reminds us that the West achieved global dominance due to specific environmental and technological advantages, but Westerners do not necessarily have superior ideas about how to live well.

Read by Crawford Logan.

Abridged by Robin Brooks.

Produced by Kirsteen Cameron.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01r...

[Jimmy · Rating 4 out of 5]

My knowledge of anthropology is somewhat limited. This book probably deserves five stars for someone more interested in that field.

Diamond concludes that humans are not basically the same everywhere, but, to be honest, I was not convinced.

[Mehmet]

Jared Diamonds külliyatını bu yıl epey okudum. Ancak okuduklarım arasında en sönük bulduğum bu kitap oldu.

Kitapta elinden geldiğince çabalasa da kolonyal Batılı bakışını hissetmiyor değil insan. "Biz Batılılar" söylemi bile tek başına yeterli. Yeni Gine'deki insanları akvaryumdaki balık gibi gözlemlemek, onları öyle detaylı gözlemlemek ki, o insanların insani varlıklarına dışarıdan yabancı bir hale gelmek sonunda.

Eski toplumlardan öğrenilebilir şeyleri irdelerken, kendi yaşlanmasına dair içsel bir yolculuğa da çıkarıyor bizi. Hayat tecrübeleri, korkuları, çekinceleri, velhasıl tüm birikimi.

Diğer kitaplardaki daha "anlatıcı bilim insanı" rolünden bu kitapta nasihat veren yaşlı bilge rolüne dönüşmüş Diamond.

05.07.2022
Ankara

[Steve · Rating 2 out of 5]

First, to be honest: I didn't finish the book. After three weeks on loan from the library, I finally accepted that I just wasn't engaged enough to finish the book. The rest of this review covers why.

I've always greatly enjoyed Jared Diamond's books and grabbed a copy of each one that I've run across. He does an excellent job of conveying a lot of information in an easy-to-read format and is normally fabulous at bringing together lots of information to make his case.

But The World Until Yesterday lacks that Jared Diamond spark. It could be me; its focus on comparative aspects of human societies may just not float my boat (certainly it's not a must-grab topic for me).

However, it seemed that the book wavered between two very different styles; one is that of an introductory textbook trying to cram lots of fact-based details in (talking about how different societies do things) and one is that of Diamond's own experiences (sometimes those of people he knows), which are sometimes revealing but more often come across as anecdotal and thus interesting but hard to generalize. At its most interesting, such as the health chapter, Diamond marshalls an array of facts while stepping out maybe a bit too far (his theory as to why European-descended populations have relatively low rates of diabetes given a Western diet is intriguing but the presented evidence is a bit flimsy). But the child-care and elder-care chapters were, to me, a tedious recitation of many differences that I had trouble keeping track of.
His discussion of New Guinean "constructive paranoia" is very anecdotal and, while interesting, left me with very little of a takeaway beyond "pay attention to your surroundings." Which my mother tried to teach me, thank you. And she's a Westerner.

In short, this book probably deserves more attention than I gave it. But for once, Diamond has not succeeded in earning that attention.

[Todd Martin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Within a relatively short timeframe humans have gone from living as hunter/gatherers in small tribes of a few hundred individuals, to agrarian communities comprised of thousands, to city-states of many millions with a broad division of labor and a representative form of government. This change in the structure of society has resulted in a dramatic alterations in lifestyle. While many of these changes have been positive (we live longer, are subject to less violence and have access to many goods and services that were unavailable to our ancestors), some of them are less so (epidemics of obesity and diabetes, and incidents of isolation). In The World Until Yesterday Jared Diamond examines traditional societies and the ways in which we may be able to learn from them in our era of sedentary desk jobs and virtual, on-line lives.

Diamond examines such topics as: trade, conflict resolution, treatment of children and the elderly, risk, religion, language and diet. Although not an anthropologist by training, Diamond is known as a polymath and has spent quite a bit of time with tribes in New Guinea. His experiences lend anecdotal support to the conclusions he draws from anthropological research.

Are there some overarching themes as to what we might learn from studies of tradition people? Well, it’s a bit of a mixed bag. Traditional lifestyles tend to be both dangerous and violent. Inter-tribal conflicts result in a higher proportion of violent death (relative to population size) than is found in state-run societies and the incidence of genocide and infanticide are more prevalent. Traditional societies are generally unfamiliar with the scientific method and instead form supernatural explanations of natural events (yes .. we have Pat Robertson, but rational individuals look to science for answers). Finally, many of the activities that surround their daily life are dictated by fear. Whether it’s the lion that may be lurking in the grass or a shift in alliances that make interactions with the tribe next door uncertain, life is stressful and requires one to adopt a paranoid mindset (Diamond refers to this as “constructive paranoia”) in order to survive.

With that said, there are some aspects of these cultures that we could learn from. In traditional societies, conflict resolution is often performed through a mediator whose goal may include both compensation and emotional closure for the victim. States resolve conflict through a court system which often provides little consolation for those that were harmed. Another area is in our treatment of children and the elderly. Some traditional groups give their children considerable freedom and revere their elders for their experience and knowledge. In state societies these demographics tend to be segregated from the larger population by age, leading to social isolation and little inter-generational learning. Finally, a quick glance at a cross section of our general population makes it abundantly clear that we have become soft, fat and unhealthy. Traditional populations had to work to survive and they only ate what they were able to collect, catch or grow. A sedentary lifestyle coupled with a diet high in fat, salt and sugar has led to a rise in heart disease, stroke and cancer. A return to a diet and active lifestyle that more closely resembles that of our ancestors could result in significant improvements in health.

One area where I take issue with Diamond is with regards to language. There are currently in the neighborhood of 7,000 languages in the world and Diamond predicts that most will have vanished or be well on their way to having become so by the year 2100. He bemoans this loss and urges that heroic measures be taken to preserve them. While I agree with Diamond that language can help preserve a groups cultural identity in the face of the homogenizing influence exerted by the state, I just don’t see the loss of a language as a particularly tragic event. It is certainly a people’s right to keep their native language alive, and failing that, linguists are certainly welcome to do their best to preserve them if they so choose, but the fact is that most are fading through simple neglect. Young people don’t want to learn them and old people that retain these skills are dying. Perhaps it’s my lack of sentimentality, but I do not believe it’s a tragedy to let nature run its course. All languages change over time. It is active, engaged bodies that keep a language vibrant and alive. A language on life-support that people have forgotten how to speak is not a language at all but a museum piece.

Diamond is one of the few scientists who can write well and explain his subject matter to a lay audience in an way that is interesting. Although the lessons he draws aren’t particularly novel or surprising (in fact, most are banal) the information about the various cultures he examines is interesting. Many of the conclusions regarding violence also dovetail nicely with those drawn by Steven Pinker in The Better Angels of Our Nature. It was a happy coincidence that I read them back to back. I will say, however, that the book went on rather too long and becomes overly repetitive towards the end (I get it, our western diet sucks and we should eat more broccoli … thanks mom).

[Yasin S. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Bütün kitaplarını okuduğum ve çok sevdiğim Jared Diamond'un bu son kitabını okumasam olmazdı. Gayet kolay anlaşılır ve akıcı bir üslupla yazılmış ve bir çok kişisel tecrübe ve ilginç bilgi ile donatılmış bu kitap bir sohbet havasında insanı sıkmayan bir anlatıma sahip.


Kitapta ilk dikkatimi çeken unsur J.D.'ın diğer kitaplarına nazaran çok daha kişisel bir kitap olmasıydı. Belli ki yaşlı ve bilge Diamond 70 yılı aşkın ömrü boyunca elde ettiği kıymetli tecrübelerini, kişisel anılarını ve günümüzün dünyasına dair yorumlarını bilimsel destekleriyle birlikte okurları ile paylaşmak istemiş.


Kitabın konusu ise daha açık olamazdı. İsmine bakmak yeterli. Onbinlerce yıllık insanlık tarihinde insanlar devlet düzenine sahip olmadan, kabileler altında doğa ile baş başa, yırtıcı hayvanlar ve diğer tehlikelerle yan yana, resmen orman kanunları altında yaşama ve soyunu devam ettirme mücadelesi vererek nesilden nesile çok kıymetli hayati tecrübeler edinmiş ve o şekilde evrilmişlerdir. Bu derin geçmişe kıyasla daha dün denilebilecek bir tarihte ise devletlerin kurulması, tarımsal ve yerleşik hayata geçilmesi, siyasi ve dini örgütlenmeler ve ardından endüstrileşmiş batılı toplumların oluşmasına tanık olan insanlık bu yeni yaşam tarzının keyfini sürmeye başladı. Fakat Diamond'un W.E.I.R.D (Westernized, Educated, Industrial Rich, Democratic) olarak tanımladığı bu yeni yaşam biçimi beraberinde insanların daha önce hiç aşina olmadığı bir çok sorunlar da getirdi. Günümüzün dünyasında sadece bir avuç insan izole yaşam alanlarında insanların yüzbinlerce yıldır alışkın olduğu geleneksel yaşam tarzını devam ettirirken geriye kalan tüm halklar W.E.I.R.D yaşam tarzına geçerek bu görece yeni ve insanların alışkın olmadığı sorunlarla mücadele etmek zorunda kalmışlardır. Bu sorunlardan bazılarını sıralamak gerekirse geleneksel dillerin ve kültürlerin asimile olması, aşırı şekerli ve tuzlu besinlerin kolayca temin edilmesi ile gelen obezite, şeker, kalp hastalıkları ve kanser çeşitleri, maaşlar, vergiler, işsizlik ve depresyon, yaşlılara olan kötü muamele, gösteriş ve tüketim çılgınlığı,hava kirliliği, kanserojenler, yalnızlık vs vs. Bu sorunların hiçbiri daha önceki geleneksel yaşam tarzında görülmeyen ya da çok ender görülen sorunlarken şu an hepimizi etkileyen ve hayat kalitemizi düşüren unsurlar haline geldiler. J.D. tabi ki modern yaşam tarzını bırakıp eski kabile hayatımıza dönelim demiyor fakat eskiden bu sorunlar olmadan yüzbinlerce yıllık hayat tecrübemiz varken neden bunlardan örnek alarak günümüzdeki hayatımıza farklı yönler katmayalım ki? diyor basitçe. Kitabın toplumsal adalet sistemi, çocuk yetiştirme ve yaşlılarla olan iletişim, hastalıklarla mücadele, savaş ve kavgalar, risk alma, din, dil, yeme içme kültürleri gibi bir çok farklı bakış açısından geleneksel ve modern hayatın ayrıntılı ve şaşırtıcı karşılaştırmalarını yaparak çok faydalı bilgiler sağladığı kesin. Bu konulara olan ilginiz ve merakınız varsa okumaktan zevk alacağınızı düşünüyorum. Yalnız bu kitap Diamond için oldukça kişisel bir kitap olduğundan daha önce başka kitaplarını okuyup yazara aşina olursanız kitaptan daha fazla zevk alabilirsiniz.

Şimdi de gelelim kitabın negatif yönlerine. Bilimi halka açıklamak misyonunu üzerine almış tüm bilim adamları teknik jargonu bir yana bırakıp daha net anlaşılmak adına çocuğa anlatır gibi sık tekrarlamalar yaparak ve zaten anladığınız konuyu anlamadığınızı farzederek sıkıcı detaylara girebiliyor. Diamond bunu hep yapıyor ve bu kitabında da maalesef oldukça fazla tekrar, detaylı anlatım, hatta tepki çekeceğini düşündüğü yerlerde 'vurmayın bakın öyle demek istemiyorum' dercesine savunmaya geçmesi biraz okuma keyfini zedeliyor. Tabi belki de böyle yapmasının kendince sebepleri vardır. Belki daha geniş halk kesimine hitap ettikçe bilim insanlarına gelen tepkiler artarak şiddetleniyordur. Bunun böyle olduğunu tahmin ettiğimden kusura bakmadım. Cahillerle uğraşmak gerçekten zor ve bezdirici olmalı.

İkinci ve en önemli negatif nokta ise yayıncının ve çevirmenin hataları. Ben bir kitap okurken çevirmeni değil yazarı okumak isterim. Çevirmenlerin kaliteli metinleri kalitesizce çevirmelerini o yazara yapılmış bir hakaret olarak görüyorum. Zaten kolay anlaşılabilir bir yazım dili kullanan Diamond'un yazılarını çevirmek bu kadar zor olmamalı. Genel okuyucu kitlesini rahatsız etmeyecek kadar da olsa oldukça fazla akıl almaz çeviri, yazım ve imla hatası barındıran bir kitap. Örneğin;

-Bypass etmek fiili kullanmak
-İngilizce dili demek
-Homo Sapiens'i Homo sapien'ler diye çevirmek
-Hiçte kolay değil - Yaşayıpta gibi komik dilbilgisi hataları
-Gıda saklama usullerinden bahsederken "tenekede" gibi bir çeviri yapması. Sanırım asıl metinde geçen "can" kelimesini konserve olarak çevirse daha mantıklı olacaktı.


gibi hatalar can sıksa da o kadar da OCD'niz yoksa keyif alacağınızı düşünüyorum.

[Laurie Bryce · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was underwhelmed by this book. Diamond keeps asking, "What ideas and practices can we learn and adopt from traditional societies?" and by the end of this very long book, I was thinking, "Not much."

There's an interesting chapter on diet -- heart disease and diabetes and similar Western world causes of death are unheard of in hunter-gatherer societies -- and that really brings home how we are literally killing ourselves with our food choices. I can see what the "Paleolithic diet" boosters are getting at!

So we can learn how to eat from our hunter-gatherer ancestors ... but what else? Across a wide range of traditional societies both in the past and in the few still existing in the present, their lives are apparently all too often brutally short and full of violence and suffering while they're alive. What's to emulate there?!

The part that stayed with me -- and there's been a lot of press about this section -- is when he describes a traditional society, in the present day, that does not believe in protecting children from harm. They treat children basically as tiny adults, and make no attempt to stop an infant from crawling into a fire, for example, or to take a machete away from a toddler. Needless to say, the adults in this tribe are usually horribly scarred from burns and cuts suffered in childhood. I couldn't sleep after reading that part of the book. How could any human being, anywhere in the world, at any time in history, watch a baby crawl into a fire and do nothing to intervene? Maybe I was so shaken by this one image that I am unable to follow Diamond's suggestion to appreciate other aspects of traditional life that might be valuable to emulate. I mostly just felt grateful that we have things like safe food, hospitals, medicine and so on!

[Vít · Rating 3 out of 5]

Jak je u Diamonda obvyklé, dozvíte se i tady v přístupné a čtivé podobě řadu zajímavých věcí. Tentokrát je to na téma srovnání našeho způsobu života s tím, jak místy ještě dnes žijí nebo nedávno žily tlupy a kmeny domorodců v pralesích, pouštích a nebo třeba v ledové Arktidě. Vzhledem k Diamondovým životním zkušenostem je zvláštní pozornost věnovaná Nové Guineji a tamějším kmenům, jejichž členové, ještě před nějakými 50 lety kanibalové žijící v době kamenné, dnes řídí auta a u televize popíjejí kolu jako jejich americké a evropské vzory. Tenhle jejich tryskový vývoj z pravěku do kosmického věku během jedné generace dává zvlášť dobrou možnost srovnat to, co bylo, s tím, co je tu teď. A srovnává se tu ledacos, od rodinných vztahů až po války, od narození až po smrt. Výchova dětí, obstarávání jídla, jak vycházíme se sousedy, jazyky kterými mluvíme... A tady pak vznikají ty otázky, na které hledá autor odpovědi. Neztratili jsme něco proti našim předkům? Nedělali něco z toho lépe? Neměli bychom se vrátit k některým věcem, které jsme pod tlakem civilizace opustili?
Diamond život našich předků nijak neglorifikuje, není to přece aktivista, ale vědec. Neopěvuje tu život v souladu s přírodou, který je přes všechny klady většinou krátký, těžký a krvavý. Hledá to pozitivní, co je přenositelné do dneška. Nejde mu o nějakou propagandu, ale o nalezení odpovědí.
Místy je to hrozně zajímavé, ale byla tu i řádka poměrně dlouhých pasáží, které mě až tak nebraly, namátkou třeba celý závěr týkající se civilizačních chorob. Takže proto ty tři hvězdy, ty ale přece znamenají "liked it".

[Jill Furedy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was the book I wanted "Beyond Civilization" to be. But I knew I wasn't getting that from Daniel Quinn. I'd not read Jared Diamond before, so wasn't sure what to expect. As interesting as nonfiction can be, I have such a hard time getting through it...they are seldom page turners. So while I liked this one, it did take me a long time to finish. The war and peace topics were alright...the question of how to interact with strangers in various societies and the strategies of state government vs tribal groups in their handling of justice were thought provoking. But the family and social aspects of raising children and aging were more along the lines I was wanting to read. The last chapters on religion, language and health were not what I was expecting for some reason, but make total sense in showing the contrasts between the modern and tribal ways of life. I feel like I need a rehash of some of the facts I read, to further consider them...but I just don't want to put the time into going back and rereading sections now (it's already overdue at the library, plus I have several fiction books waiting that will be quick reads!). But this is one I may have to revisit later.