What do you think?
Rate this book
This Town: Two Parties and a Funeral — plus plenty of valet parking! — in America's Gilded Capital
'The great thing about Washington is no matter how many elections you lose, how many times you're indicted, how many scandals you've been tainted by, well, the great thing is you can always eat lunch in that town again. What keeps the permanent government spinning on its carousel is the freedom of shamelessness, and that mother's milk of politics, cash. In Mark Leibovich’s remarkable look at the way things really work in D.C., a funeral for a beloved television star becomes the perfect networking platform, a disgraced political aide can emerge with more power than his boss, campaign losers befriend their vanquishers (and make more money than ever!), "conflict of interest" is a term lost in translation, political reporters are fetishized and worshipped for their ability to get one's name in print, and, well - we're all really friends, aren't we? What Julia Phillips did for Hollywood, Timothy Crouse did for journalists, and Michael Lewis did for Wall Street, Mark Leibovich does for our nation's capital.'
386 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2013
510 people are currently reading
5256 people want to read
About the author
Mark Leibovich
8 books137 followersMark Leibovich is The New York Times Magazine chief national correspondent, based in Washington, D.C. In 2011, he received a National Magazine Award for his story on Politico's Mike Allen and the changing media culture of Washington. Prior to coming to The New York Times Magazine, Leibovich was a national political reporter in the Times's D.C. bureau. He has also worked at The Washington Post, The San Jose Mercury News, and The Boston Phoenix. Leibovich lives with his family in Washington, D.C.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 928 reviews
July 26, 2013
From the start, I suspected this book would amount to nothing beyond a mildly amusing piece of muckraking, but I picked it up hoping for something more. And while Leibovich does offer some interesting insights about the inner workings of Washington D.C., his book never challenged my initial impressions. Fortunately, Leibovich is unpretentious enough to know what kind of writer he is, and to be upfront in his own complicity with business as usual in This Town. It makes the book feel honest, even if it is also sickening.
This book is like reading the journal of an anthropologist who is investigating a particularly curious tribe of previously undiscovered humans. They engage in all the typical behaviors: collective rituals, petty disputes, periods of skirmish and reconciliation, and social ladder climbing. But, in the end, this tribe is held together by the pursuit of its one true love: money. As an outsider looking in, this book confirms some of the worst impressions I've had in recent years of how things work in the US Capitol. The rampant emotional insecurity of our nation's "leaders," probably the most intriguing of Leibovich's observations, joins forces with unchecked greed to form a potent social glue that enables even This Town's most bereft members to stage disturbingly lucrative comebacks after suffering public humiliation.
This book is disturbing and frustrating. With no more than the occasional cursory reference to the economic and political havoc wreaked on normal US citizens by This Town in recent years, Leibovich trundles through an increasingly dull list of painfully ostentatious moments. It's all made worse by the fact that, while he is certainly critical in a real and witty way, Leibovich appears to accept this world, for better or worse. He can't truly condemn This Town because he's part of it. Most of this book oozes an appropriately caustic sarcasm, but there are also quiet moments of reverence that I found nauseating. These moments reveal just how warped Leibovich's perspective has become during his time spent in This Town. For all his attempts to "expose" and "shed light" on the sad activities of his colleagues, Leibovich's most potent offering is the simple fact that he, despite his awareness of exactly how petty and corrupt things have become, is drinking the monetary Kool Aid like every other Washingtonian asshole. There is something brave in this project, but it still made me regretful that I paid money to read it. No one should make a dime off spending all his time loitering around at parties, hoping someone says something embarrassing. And while Leibovich seems to understand the irony of his situation, it didn't endear him to me at all.
This is a fine book for what it is. I don't think it falsely advertises anything, so perhaps the fault is mine for hoping it would try to actually subvert This Town, rather than implying that, sure, it's too bad, but that's just the "way things are."
This book is like reading the journal of an anthropologist who is investigating a particularly curious tribe of previously undiscovered humans. They engage in all the typical behaviors: collective rituals, petty disputes, periods of skirmish and reconciliation, and social ladder climbing. But, in the end, this tribe is held together by the pursuit of its one true love: money. As an outsider looking in, this book confirms some of the worst impressions I've had in recent years of how things work in the US Capitol. The rampant emotional insecurity of our nation's "leaders," probably the most intriguing of Leibovich's observations, joins forces with unchecked greed to form a potent social glue that enables even This Town's most bereft members to stage disturbingly lucrative comebacks after suffering public humiliation.
This book is disturbing and frustrating. With no more than the occasional cursory reference to the economic and political havoc wreaked on normal US citizens by This Town in recent years, Leibovich trundles through an increasingly dull list of painfully ostentatious moments. It's all made worse by the fact that, while he is certainly critical in a real and witty way, Leibovich appears to accept this world, for better or worse. He can't truly condemn This Town because he's part of it. Most of this book oozes an appropriately caustic sarcasm, but there are also quiet moments of reverence that I found nauseating. These moments reveal just how warped Leibovich's perspective has become during his time spent in This Town. For all his attempts to "expose" and "shed light" on the sad activities of his colleagues, Leibovich's most potent offering is the simple fact that he, despite his awareness of exactly how petty and corrupt things have become, is drinking the monetary Kool Aid like every other Washingtonian asshole. There is something brave in this project, but it still made me regretful that I paid money to read it. No one should make a dime off spending all his time loitering around at parties, hoping someone says something embarrassing. And while Leibovich seems to understand the irony of his situation, it didn't endear him to me at all.
This is a fine book for what it is. I don't think it falsely advertises anything, so perhaps the fault is mine for hoping it would try to actually subvert This Town, rather than implying that, sure, it's too bad, but that's just the "way things are."
September 26, 2013
If your cynicism concerning American politics has grown flaccid from lack of exercise, this lacerating book will tone you right up. Mark Leibovich, a reporter for the New York Times, represents Washington as a non-stop petting party of self-promotion, double-dealing, shameless ass-licking, and stomach-wrenching pieties. The three-sectioned revolving door that connects elective offices to the lobbying leviathan to the airport world of 24-hour cable news never stops spinning, and the players never have to explain their beliefs or their behaviors. Thus William Bennett, former Education Secretary and Drug Czar under Reagan, moves from that gig to author, peddling a series of a hollow arguments for a moral diet of reading for children, and from there becomes a talking head on CNN, and from there to an exposed gambling addict who lost hundreds of thousands in Vegas before going back to speak sonorously about the moral force of John McCain. Just about every media creature you’ve seen on cable TV--CNN, Fox, MSNBC—is here as well the big hunks like Tom Brokow and Brian Williams. Andrea Mitchell, who tells us about political events for NBC, attends every party in town always trailed by her catatonic spouse, Alan Greenspan. Ben Bradley is here, now in his 90’s, and sadly losing it. At one soiree, Katie Couric is spotted getting an intimate foot rub from Morgan Freeman. The book provides a robust aggregation of events from the funeral party (it was a party) celebrating the life of Tim Russert to the second inauguration of Barak Obama (which was less like a party). Leibovich was interviewed on NPR shortly after the book came out, and he was asked if he’s getting any dirty looks from the people he wrote about. He said not really. More people were upset if they were not included in the book. He refused to build an index because of a phenomenon he called the “Washington read.” You go into a bookstore, peruse a book about events in the capital, and then turn immediately to the index to see if your name is there. If it isn’t, you put the book back. If it is, you read the pages where you are mentioned. Then you put the book back. Leibovich wanted to sell some books.
Someone once called Washington, “Hollywood for ugly people.” It’s hard to disagree after reading this gossip-rich tear through our nation's capital.
Someone once called Washington, “Hollywood for ugly people.” It’s hard to disagree after reading this gossip-rich tear through our nation's capital.
December 4, 2013
I like Leibovich's newspaper writing a lot-he's smart, insightful, and often hilarious. And he is, by all accounts, a great guy. But I found reading This Town like eating cotton candy - it tastes good for a second, (because he's smart, insightful, and funny) but then you feel kind of sick to your stomach.
My problem wasn't just the "meta" thing that everyone points out. Yes, yes, Leibovich is part of the very "problem" he purports to unearth. He appears on cable, goes to parties with shallow people, forgets and drops names, etc, etc.
My bigger issue is that this town - my town - is also filled with incredibly dedicated people doing incredibly important things. We are human, and many of us are self-important, and some are total jackasses. But for the most part, the ecosystem of this book is populated by very smart, very hard-working people who are in this business for the right reasons - they want to change the country for what they view as the better. Most could make more money for far fewer hours in other lines of work.
Every city of the powerful - NY, LA, Paris, etc - has its share of posers and climbers. But for every Kurt Bardella there is a Jason Furman - brilliant and accomplished, with PLENTY of other options, choosing to stay and to serve because they want to do the right thing. These folks, who constitute the lion's share of people in this town, deserve more than a "to be sure" graph in a book like this.
My problem wasn't just the "meta" thing that everyone points out. Yes, yes, Leibovich is part of the very "problem" he purports to unearth. He appears on cable, goes to parties with shallow people, forgets and drops names, etc, etc.
My bigger issue is that this town - my town - is also filled with incredibly dedicated people doing incredibly important things. We are human, and many of us are self-important, and some are total jackasses. But for the most part, the ecosystem of this book is populated by very smart, very hard-working people who are in this business for the right reasons - they want to change the country for what they view as the better. Most could make more money for far fewer hours in other lines of work.
Every city of the powerful - NY, LA, Paris, etc - has its share of posers and climbers. But for every Kurt Bardella there is a Jason Furman - brilliant and accomplished, with PLENTY of other options, choosing to stay and to serve because they want to do the right thing. These folks, who constitute the lion's share of people in this town, deserve more than a "to be sure" graph in a book like this.
July 20, 2014
In a nearly 400 page ramble, Leibovich lets roll anecdote after anecdote of the "grimy ecosystem" that is Washington's political culture. It's gross. It's pathetic. It's nauseating. Most of the people in the book you would not want to pull from burning car wrecks because their absence from political or media life would be an improvement - well, theoretically. In reality they would instantly be replaced by some equally disgusting, equally ass-licking schmuck.
The two people who come off looking best here are Barack Obama, who despises the D.C. media-political cesspool, mocks it, and tries the best he can to keep his distance from it, and Harry Reid, who loathes parties and schmoozing.
Some of the gossipy details are enjoyable. Leibovich's snarky tone works, mostly, although the style of the book is overly chatty. The chapter on Kurt Bardella (Darrell Issa's PR flack) shouldn't have made it into the book: though Bardella may be a good example of eager beaver D.C. brownnosing, no one outside of Capitol Hill or the Washington media or his own family has ever heard of him. The Bardella chapter seemed to go on forever. Leibovich wrote it originally for the NYT magazine, and I suppose he really loves it, so it had to stay.
By the end of the book the biggest problem I had with it is that Leibovich, for all the distance he tries to put between himself and and the suck-up media, is still an insider and thus not able or willing to expose some of his colleagues. He has lots of friends in the New York-D.C. media world, as you might expect him to. This means he will probably not be willing to say anything negative about them. I noticed in the thank yous at the end he thanked David Plotz and Hanna Rosin, who are longtime Slate staffers. (It seemed like they might be part of his extended family - I couldn't really tell.) As editor of Slate, Plotz has overseen a great deal of its transformation into a site that elevates snark and clickbait over substance and real journalism. Not to mention all the staffers at the NYT whom he thanks, many of which are among the worst examples of Washington's "grimy ecosystem." I mean, seriously, Maureen Dowd? You lose all credibility when the deranged Dowd is one of the first people you thank.
Some snippets I found interesting:
So, Harry Reid. I feel like Harry and I could be the best of friends. Harry is a loner. He doesn't cultivate many friendships. He hates parties. If he has to go to a party or fundraiser, he's in and out in five minutes. To keep phone calls brief, he often skips saying goodbye. Reid, a Mormon, loves the Jews. I'm not quite sure why except that his wife Landra was a Jew who converted to Mormonism when they married. Reid "has a heightened sense of smell. He once complained about the body odor of summer tourists trekking through the Capitol, taking the occasion of a dedication ceremony for a new Capitol visitor center to make his annoyance public. "In the summertime," he said, "because of the high humidity and how hot it gets here, you could literally smell the tourists coming into the Capitol."
Reid sometimes does yoga with his wife, wearing black Lycra stretch pants.
Trent Lott does not allow the different foods on his plate to touch.
Mary Matalin signed a deal as a celebrity voice to present the safety instructions before takeoff on Independence Air.
Obama quickly tired of Richard Holbrooke, his special adviser on Pakistan and Afghanistan. Holbrooke had dreamed of being Hillary Clinton's Secretary of State if she were elected. When she became Obama's Sec. of State, Obama allowed her to bring Holbrooke on board. Holbrooke was widely regarded as a pretentious, overblown ass. "The ego has landed," Obama staffers would email each other on their Blackberrys when he arrived to meetings. In 2009, when troop levels were the topic of discussion, Holbrooke informed Obama "that he faced "a momentous decision," comparable to what Lyndon Johnson confronted over Vietnam." Obama responded to Holbrooke, "Do people really talk like that?"
When reporter Jeffrey Goldberg sheepishly gave Obama a copy of his new book, titled New American Haggadah, which he wanted the White House to use for its seder, Obama asked, "Does this mean we can't use the Maxwell House Haggadah?" I know nothing about seders but I have to confess I love it that Maxwell House offers instruction on them.
[Susan Rice has been one of the most unjustly smeared officials in Obama's administration - the lies about what she said regarding Benghazi spread like wildfire, basically starting with John McCain the same day; regardless of how easy it is to check the actual video of what Rice's words were, almost no one has bothered to do so - or cares that she has been misquoted and slimed so malignantly. -ed.] "Earlier that week, Rice's prospective nomination to be the next secretary of state had been harpooned, mostly by Republicans. John McCain, who had picked Sarah Palin to be his running mate four and a half years earlier, said Rice was "not very bright" and "not qualified" for the job. In truth, Rice rubbed a select bipartisan contingent the wrong way. She was often called a "brusque" and "doesn't suffer fools gladly" type, which can be big trouble in This Town, especially for a woman. Richard Holbrooke, too, was the epitome of brusque and doesn't suffer fools gladly, yet he was a particular darling among the same set of Thought Leaders he spent much of his life cultivating. Rice did not, and one member of the White House national security team noted that her ultimate kiss of death was inflicted by the supreme Thought Leader himself, Times columnist Thomas Friedman: "I don't know Rice at all," he wrote, "so I have no opinion on her fitness for the job." "
May 15, 2015
What an insipid piece of drivel. Washington covered by a glorified gossip columnist whose ego approximates those he writes about. There is no genuine outrage or even wicked humor. Junior high intrigue with the equivalent of fart jokes. Instead of a Mencken-like dressing down of the hypocrites, bloviators and self-interested elite, the author focuses on the dead (Tim Russert and Richard Holbrooke), socialites, congressional media flacks and online journalists. The equivalent analogy for describing this feckless piece of reporting is when individuals blame a particular lower status group of individuals as scapegoats for a particular societal problem. When we have reporters like this covering important news for august publications like the NY Times, focusing on gossipy issues, can't we also indict these "public regulators" who ought to keep elected officials honest instead of being co-opted into the same type of cozy relationships that make citizens distrustful of their government.
August 11, 2013
As John Oliver said, "It's funny, it's interesting, and it's demoralizing. I mean, people generally have a low opinion of Washington and this book seems to point out that that low opinion might be too high... There's a black heart at the center of this book. I loved it as much as you can love something that hurts your heart." He was laughing when he said most of it, but yeah, totally.
The heart of the book is how many, many people never leave Washington D.C. once there. Politicians become lobbyists become journalists become consultants and the cycle goes around and around with everyone parlaying public service into a healthy, money-making career. It also discusses how interconnected everyone is to the point where "conflict of interest" doesn't even begin to cover it. Kind of makes you understand how easy it is for someone like President Obama - or any politician - to come to town, determined to change the way things are done only to give up because you can't fight the system. Or how easy it is to decide that the system works just fine for you. A little bit of Washington gossip, but mostly just interesting, thought-provoking, depressing stuff. Leibovich, by the way, is upfront about the fact that, as a Washington journalist, he's pretty much in the middle of the system, benefiting from it as much as anyone. He's very self-deprecating which saves him from coming off as a hypocrite. Definitely a good read.
The heart of the book is how many, many people never leave Washington D.C. once there. Politicians become lobbyists become journalists become consultants and the cycle goes around and around with everyone parlaying public service into a healthy, money-making career. It also discusses how interconnected everyone is to the point where "conflict of interest" doesn't even begin to cover it. Kind of makes you understand how easy it is for someone like President Obama - or any politician - to come to town, determined to change the way things are done only to give up because you can't fight the system. Or how easy it is to decide that the system works just fine for you. A little bit of Washington gossip, but mostly just interesting, thought-provoking, depressing stuff. Leibovich, by the way, is upfront about the fact that, as a Washington journalist, he's pretty much in the middle of the system, benefiting from it as much as anyone. He's very self-deprecating which saves him from coming off as a hypocrite. Definitely a good read.
August 11, 2013
I returned from vacation to discover the Washington Post -- a major character in a book I finished, _This Town_ -- was sold for $250 million in cash to Jeff Bezos.
_This Town_ is mostly about the WaPo's main competitor, Politico, and the destruction it has wreaked on the cloistered world of Washington DC. But not just Politico -- the entire class of politicians using public service as a springboard to lobbying millions and how a trickle has become a flood. No longer do people get elected to public office to serve in public office. Now they get elected to public office for fame, for hanging out in television show green rooms, for cash, for bribes, for parties, for recognition, and to appear, yes, in the daily emailed letters from Politico.
The best way to read _This Town_ is to pretend all the characters in the story are fictional. Otherwise, the temptation to throw the book into the sea becomes so great it overwhelms the senses and over the side of the boat it goes. The people are, for the most part, horrible people and they are horrible a-politically -- _This Town_ does not subscribe to any left-right politics and rare is the political book who treats all the horrible people with equal even-handedness. They are all horrible, regardless where they fall on the political spectrum. It's best to pretend because otherwise reality is too awful.
A few of the characters in the book are exactly as they are on the tin: Haley Barbour (who clearly played along extensively with the author), Darrell Issa, Bill Clinton, Trent Lott. A few come out looking better than you would expect: Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Paul Ryan. But the rest -- the status seekers and the money seekers and the party goers and the insecure politicians -- are a horrible class of people with varying degrees of terrible.
And then there's Barack Obama for whom I left with a very confused picture -- just like everyone else on earth, apparently. He's a man who hates the DC game and refuses to play and is endlessly frustrated by the insistence of everyone around him to play instead of getting down to the hard wonkish business of government. He feels like a man trapped in a glass box. He wants to be there but everyone around him would rather be at a cocktail party in Georgetown. What is a President to do?
I greatly enjoyed _This Town_. It's a refreshing break from the pointless back and forth of the blogs and twitter and Facebook and "winning the cycle" to walk through Washington as it is today with no agenda. I got more out of this book than I have out of a 1,000 hours of reading various op-eds and "serious" journalistic pieces. I was left with a healthy hatred for Politico (and Terry McAuliffe and Dirk Gephardt), a worry about the sanity for the staffers who inhabit the halls of power like tiny ants, and a resignation at the Gilded Age-era rotating door between Congress and enormous lobby firms -- excuse me, "strategic consultants."
If you want to understand the news, read _This Town_. But don't read it on a full stomach.
_This Town_ is mostly about the WaPo's main competitor, Politico, and the destruction it has wreaked on the cloistered world of Washington DC. But not just Politico -- the entire class of politicians using public service as a springboard to lobbying millions and how a trickle has become a flood. No longer do people get elected to public office to serve in public office. Now they get elected to public office for fame, for hanging out in television show green rooms, for cash, for bribes, for parties, for recognition, and to appear, yes, in the daily emailed letters from Politico.
The best way to read _This Town_ is to pretend all the characters in the story are fictional. Otherwise, the temptation to throw the book into the sea becomes so great it overwhelms the senses and over the side of the boat it goes. The people are, for the most part, horrible people and they are horrible a-politically -- _This Town_ does not subscribe to any left-right politics and rare is the political book who treats all the horrible people with equal even-handedness. They are all horrible, regardless where they fall on the political spectrum. It's best to pretend because otherwise reality is too awful.
A few of the characters in the book are exactly as they are on the tin: Haley Barbour (who clearly played along extensively with the author), Darrell Issa, Bill Clinton, Trent Lott. A few come out looking better than you would expect: Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Paul Ryan. But the rest -- the status seekers and the money seekers and the party goers and the insecure politicians -- are a horrible class of people with varying degrees of terrible.
And then there's Barack Obama for whom I left with a very confused picture -- just like everyone else on earth, apparently. He's a man who hates the DC game and refuses to play and is endlessly frustrated by the insistence of everyone around him to play instead of getting down to the hard wonkish business of government. He feels like a man trapped in a glass box. He wants to be there but everyone around him would rather be at a cocktail party in Georgetown. What is a President to do?
I greatly enjoyed _This Town_. It's a refreshing break from the pointless back and forth of the blogs and twitter and Facebook and "winning the cycle" to walk through Washington as it is today with no agenda. I got more out of this book than I have out of a 1,000 hours of reading various op-eds and "serious" journalistic pieces. I was left with a healthy hatred for Politico (and Terry McAuliffe and Dirk Gephardt), a worry about the sanity for the staffers who inhabit the halls of power like tiny ants, and a resignation at the Gilded Age-era rotating door between Congress and enormous lobby firms -- excuse me, "strategic consultants."
If you want to understand the news, read _This Town_. But don't read it on a full stomach.
November 25, 2013
Who cares? Why is this book being touted by all the NPR folks? Why do I trust you, NPR?? I guess some people at your illustrious organization must be great friends of Mark Leibovich and you are all just doing him a favor. You would have done better to be honest with him and tell him, "sorry, Mark, your book sucks rocks." Ugh. I thought I was a bit of a political junkie, but I must not be because as I read through the chapters of this, I kept yawning and thinking 'what is the point?'
This book takes some of the big personalities (politicians, lawyers, journalists, pundits, etc.) that populate Washington and pokes and prods at them as if the author has decided somebody needs to let the air out of all these big fat tires. In fact, he compares these personalities to those big floating balloons in the Maceys Thanksgiving Day parade, and I would compare HIM to the guy who is taking careful aim and shooting down each and every balloon, just as it looms into view. I am completely fine with that, because I am myself pretty cynical about the lack of character in these elected and unelected political and media types, but his execution here leaves much to be desired. This book is a jumble of tiny anecdotes and random gossip that doesn't seem to coalesce into anything substantive. I get that the author is hoping to paint a picture of the Washington he knows --full of egomaniacs who only seem to care about promoting themselves and making money, I just wonder if maybe he himself hasn't been in Washington too long, too. Maybe he thinks that these things matter to the rest of us, and frankly, for me at least, they don't. Could he himself be hypnotized by the 'power' and 'prestige' around him, enough to think that maybe he should write a book and take them all down a notch or two? And that in doing so he would be making something that matters to the world at large? In fact, this book probably only matters to the hundred or so people who are mentioned in it.
Maybe I was expecting something more intelligent or even just more cohesive, something that gelled together. This book is irreverent, full of slang, snappy, but sadly lacking in substance. When I was in college writing my first research paper, I remember my professor telling us we always needed to keep in mind our 'so what?' question. You don't want the reader to get to the end of your paper and ask 'so what?'
Well, that's my question: So what, Mr. Leibovich? So what?
This book takes some of the big personalities (politicians, lawyers, journalists, pundits, etc.) that populate Washington and pokes and prods at them as if the author has decided somebody needs to let the air out of all these big fat tires. In fact, he compares these personalities to those big floating balloons in the Maceys Thanksgiving Day parade, and I would compare HIM to the guy who is taking careful aim and shooting down each and every balloon, just as it looms into view. I am completely fine with that, because I am myself pretty cynical about the lack of character in these elected and unelected political and media types, but his execution here leaves much to be desired. This book is a jumble of tiny anecdotes and random gossip that doesn't seem to coalesce into anything substantive. I get that the author is hoping to paint a picture of the Washington he knows --full of egomaniacs who only seem to care about promoting themselves and making money, I just wonder if maybe he himself hasn't been in Washington too long, too. Maybe he thinks that these things matter to the rest of us, and frankly, for me at least, they don't. Could he himself be hypnotized by the 'power' and 'prestige' around him, enough to think that maybe he should write a book and take them all down a notch or two? And that in doing so he would be making something that matters to the world at large? In fact, this book probably only matters to the hundred or so people who are mentioned in it.
Maybe I was expecting something more intelligent or even just more cohesive, something that gelled together. This book is irreverent, full of slang, snappy, but sadly lacking in substance. When I was in college writing my first research paper, I remember my professor telling us we always needed to keep in mind our 'so what?' question. You don't want the reader to get to the end of your paper and ask 'so what?'
Well, that's my question: So what, Mr. Leibovich? So what?
December 4, 2013
I've worked as an attorney for the US Dept of Labor and lived in DC since 1998. So I have some experience with "This Town". There are a few things that I like about the book. I think it aptly describes the reality that people take politics very, very seriously, and yet, they can be entirely cordial with each other personally. I actually live on Capitol Hill (some folks don't know it is a neighborhood, not just a building) and I was shocked when I first moved here that senior level Republicans and Dems would be neighbors-- and yet folks never get up in each others face. You could see people saying the most awful things about another person on TV, and yet see them later that day chatting amiably in the park as their kids or dogs run around. No one in the neighborhood pickets in front of the opposition's house-- no nasty graffiti targeting a foe. One could be cynical and say it is because there is a lot of security cameras around, but I don't think that is it. It seems like it has just always been that way and that is just the way things are done. I got over my discomfort of seeing seemingly nice neighbors go after each other in front of the camera by just turning off the TV.
I wish Mr. Leibovich had focused more on the positive things about the actual residents of DC-- instead, its a cynical take down of the transient political players and the media types that generally don't even live in DC. Mr. LEibovich is an actual DC resident and I expected better of him.
I found myself pushing to read the book as fast as possible because the entire thing feels dated. There was far too much focus on Bill Clinton over Obama. The only thing that seemed remotely fresh about the book was the recognition of Politico and twitter over print media-- but since I was reading the book in its actually hard back state, it only served to emphasize how outdated the book is. And yet somehow Mr. Leibovich makes Twitter and Politico seem like passing fancies that will soon enough be replaced with something else.
I appreciated the book for throwing light on all the politicians that jump into lobbying for big $$$ after leaving politics. I wish Leibovich had spent time presenting those that aren't hypocrites -- and if there are none now, talk about those patriots of past times that would return to their communities after retiring from public service. For my taste, the book was just too relentlessly negative. The politicians probably deserve it, but I'd like to hear ideas about what can be done to fix the problem. It just seems incomplete to bitch about something without providing alternatives.
I do tip my hat to Mr. Leibovich for his ability to describe people and for his access to good stories. I frequently laughed out loud. I think his sketch of Harry Reid was especially interesting. And Kurt Bardella-- a terrific foil to what an aide is supposed to be like.
Overall, there are some nice bits in the book, but it is too cynical and pointless for my taste.
I wish Mr. Leibovich had focused more on the positive things about the actual residents of DC-- instead, its a cynical take down of the transient political players and the media types that generally don't even live in DC. Mr. LEibovich is an actual DC resident and I expected better of him.
I found myself pushing to read the book as fast as possible because the entire thing feels dated. There was far too much focus on Bill Clinton over Obama. The only thing that seemed remotely fresh about the book was the recognition of Politico and twitter over print media-- but since I was reading the book in its actually hard back state, it only served to emphasize how outdated the book is. And yet somehow Mr. Leibovich makes Twitter and Politico seem like passing fancies that will soon enough be replaced with something else.
I appreciated the book for throwing light on all the politicians that jump into lobbying for big $$$ after leaving politics. I wish Leibovich had spent time presenting those that aren't hypocrites -- and if there are none now, talk about those patriots of past times that would return to their communities after retiring from public service. For my taste, the book was just too relentlessly negative. The politicians probably deserve it, but I'd like to hear ideas about what can be done to fix the problem. It just seems incomplete to bitch about something without providing alternatives.
I do tip my hat to Mr. Leibovich for his ability to describe people and for his access to good stories. I frequently laughed out loud. I think his sketch of Harry Reid was especially interesting. And Kurt Bardella-- a terrific foil to what an aide is supposed to be like.
Overall, there are some nice bits in the book, but it is too cynical and pointless for my taste.
March 11, 2021
Politically, I like to follow the old-school definitions of "liberal" and "conservative". "Liberal" meaning we do our best to take care of people for the betterment of society, and "conservative" meaning we spend our money wisely to do so.
You'll find none of that in Marc Leibovich's This Town.
Leibovich drains the swamp to show us that what's in the water is a bunch of blatantly corruptible celebrity wannabes whose main concern isn't what you think it is. And the book is fun as hell to read. (It was written pre-Trump, so it stands as a moment in time.)
A longtime political reporter, Leibovich purposely didn't include an index in the book because he knew the people he was writing about would only use it to seek out their own name and read only what he wrote about them. Unsurprisingly, the egos in D.C. are in constant need of attention.
This Town doesn't just target politicians. There are plenty of status-hungry reporters and various other functionaries and hangers-on of dubious motivation, one of whom said that if someone doesn't know what you do for a living, then you're probably doing it right.
Though often lighthearted, there are some sobering allegations. Mostly that Washington doesn't really care what you think. All the "Big Issue" social topics -- abortion, race, guns -- are fodder for platform statements intended to get your vote. The idea of partisanship is mostly manufactured.
If you want a deep dive into real-life policy making (and you should), read any one of Bob Woodward's important but dry-as-toast tomes, but this book strips away some of the gravitas of the moment and cleanses the palate for us political junkies.
-Keith O'D
Find this book and other titles within our catalog.
You'll find none of that in Marc Leibovich's This Town.
Leibovich drains the swamp to show us that what's in the water is a bunch of blatantly corruptible celebrity wannabes whose main concern isn't what you think it is. And the book is fun as hell to read. (It was written pre-Trump, so it stands as a moment in time.)
A longtime political reporter, Leibovich purposely didn't include an index in the book because he knew the people he was writing about would only use it to seek out their own name and read only what he wrote about them. Unsurprisingly, the egos in D.C. are in constant need of attention.
This Town doesn't just target politicians. There are plenty of status-hungry reporters and various other functionaries and hangers-on of dubious motivation, one of whom said that if someone doesn't know what you do for a living, then you're probably doing it right.
Though often lighthearted, there are some sobering allegations. Mostly that Washington doesn't really care what you think. All the "Big Issue" social topics -- abortion, race, guns -- are fodder for platform statements intended to get your vote. The idea of partisanship is mostly manufactured.
If you want a deep dive into real-life policy making (and you should), read any one of Bob Woodward's important but dry-as-toast tomes, but this book strips away some of the gravitas of the moment and cleanses the palate for us political junkies.
-Keith O'D
Find this book and other titles within our catalog.
November 7, 2013
What could have been a fun, acerbic and deeply enraging long-read was allowed to metastasize into a preening, self-aware (the author was not embedded, he was in his own habitat) yet deeply conceited mess of a journalistic 'expose'. When reading, you oscillate between frustration over this ridiculous cast of characters, morbid fascination over their inflated sense of self-worth, and anger that you haven't thrown this pop-corn of the mind away at some point. I am still slightly mad at myself for having finished this book. Don't get me wrong, it has some good bits, distressing, memorable bits - maybe an 80-page version would've packed a much bigger punch.
October 21, 2020
A highbrow beach read--witty, well written and shallow. None of the insights will surprise, though the tales will amuse, or disgust, depending on one's view of how vampiric Washington is and how much you think that matters.
Most of the book's themes aren't original. To wit: DC is disconnected from the rest of the country, lobbyists wield too much power and too many pols migrate to "Gucci Gulch" after their terms are done. About the only new idea is that the 'net and mobile technology have added another element to the self-interested, self-satisfied mania. The guy, for example, held out as the current epitome of the DC media, Mike Allen of Politico, doesn't seem a talented writer or reporter. Rather, he just appears more, literally, plugged in--more willing to broadcast himself via every device and stay constantly hooked to his smartphone and computer. Sure, he seems hard working, but to what real end? Maybe, in the end, that's the book's real and depressing takeaway: what meaningful goal does much of the manic busyness in today's Washington serve?
Most of the book's themes aren't original. To wit: DC is disconnected from the rest of the country, lobbyists wield too much power and too many pols migrate to "Gucci Gulch" after their terms are done. About the only new idea is that the 'net and mobile technology have added another element to the self-interested, self-satisfied mania. The guy, for example, held out as the current epitome of the DC media, Mike Allen of Politico, doesn't seem a talented writer or reporter. Rather, he just appears more, literally, plugged in--more willing to broadcast himself via every device and stay constantly hooked to his smartphone and computer. Sure, he seems hard working, but to what real end? Maybe, in the end, that's the book's real and depressing takeaway: what meaningful goal does much of the manic busyness in today's Washington serve?
January 24, 2014
A name-dropping gossipfest about the political-media-lobbyist-corporate Washington revolving door (as somebody remarks, "If we were any more incestuous, our children would be born with extra fingers.") As portrayed here, all the players are concerned exclusively with promoting their own brand, universally regard the voters as morons, and have no interest in policy beyond how it plays in Politico. I imagine this is accurate, but perhaps it could have been made interesting.
June 24, 2015
Bleh. I have been meaning to read this book for a couple of years. Finally got around to listening to it on audio book. Even if you are interested in politics, as I am, this was so boring. It was like a laundry list of DC names and who knows who, but none of the anecdotes were particularly interesting. And I was annoyed by how often the author wrote "this town" in reference to DC, like he was trying to create a tag line. I couldn't finish it, even on audio.
September 6, 2023
Makes me miss living in the DC area and reminds me why I left
February 1, 2014
Leibovich, a talented reporter, covers the behavior of the power establishment in Washington DC from just before Barak Obama's election in 2008 to his second inaugural. Witty, gossipy, insightful, rarely complimentary, his account might appeal to a Vanity Fair kind of audience, more interested in the interplay of people and events than in the import of the issues. I suspect that if you already know a lot about how Washington operates, the book is appealing because of the personalities. If you are not au fait with the inside game in Washington, this account could be quite a shocker. A great number of good people come to Washington every year from around the country to practice politics, law, promote culture or carry on business. The decentralized distribution of power in our capital, and the necessity to have large executive bureaucracies to carry out the complicated public policies enacted by the legislature or promulgated by the regulators offer nearly endless opportunities to have influence -- and to make money if you aren't in the public service sector. The temptation to garner wealth and fame from the great game of Washington, Leibovich tells us, can overwhelm nearly every well-intentioned values-based individual who shows up to save the country. When you finish the book, you might be tempted to go wash your hands. One could wonder if this tawdry scene, perceived at only a slight remove by the country at large, might be part of the reason why the Tea Party has enjoyed overweighted influence.
September 22, 2013
There's a term called the "Washington read," which is recited in this book, about the habit of DC power players and would-bes to skim the indices of new books for their name, to read about themselves, before putting it back on the bookshelf and walking off. Consequently, Mark Leibovich's mostly catty and definitely fun book about the media figures, lobbyists, and politicians who have gained admittance to Washington's elite social scene, has no index. No problem, it's a quick read, and it includes fascinating portraits in slight disrepute: most here are guilty of no more than obliviousness and self-regard, and things turn enjoyably meta when Politico learns about the forthcoming book. Having spent more than a decade in Washington myself, the vicarious thrill of seeing former colleagues and acquaintances, plus current and former clients, gossiped about at a safe remove from my own interests was giddy fun. To borrow a phrase, this book is a fish, a barrel and a smoking gun.
August 20, 2013
The book told the same story over and over. Although the author tried to be funny, he did not succeed in my opinion. To be fair, there are some decent anecdotes, but rather than read 350+ pages of repetitive stories driving home the same point, you can probably find them online somewhere. In addition, this book, which is billed as a takedown of Washington did not deliver the goods. Did you really need to read this book to find out that Terry McAuliffe likes to raise money or that politicians can put on a sad face at a funeral? The only chapter that was mildly informative was the one on Kurt Bandella. Anyway, this book doesn't tell us anything we already didn't know. Washington is filled with greedy people who rotate in and out of government to make an easy buck. There, I saved you wasting 5-6 hours reading 350 repetitive pages to reinforce that point.
October 27, 2013
As much as I enjoy politics, I found this a pretty smarmy pretentious book mainly dedicated to name dropping and self adulation. (No surprise in DC these days!) Interesting look at the revolving door between lobbying firms and government. And, unfortunately, the big sell out is as true as we have long imagined it to be.
January 27, 2023
Entertaining trip down memory lane of 2008-2012 in DC.
April 6, 2017
Washington, DC, served up on the skewer of satire
Here is Washington, DC, laid bare by the discerning eye and poison pen of The New York Times Magazine’s chief national correspondent there. If you think most of what takes place in the nation’s capital has little or nothing to do with anything outside the District of Columbia, well, it turns out you’re right.
“Getting rich has become the great bipartisan ideal,” writes Mark Leibovich. “’No Democrats and Republicans in Washington anymore, only millionaires,’ goes the maxim. The ultimate Green party. You still hear the term ‘public service’ thrown around, but often with irony and full knowledge that ‘self-service’ is now the real insider play.”
Never before, with the possible exception of Rome under the Emperor Nero or Paris under Louis XIV, have so many self-indulgent people come together in one place to flatter one another so effusively while concealing sharp knives in their purses or pockets. It’s a wonder, really, why Mark Leibovich still keeps his home there . . . unless, perhaps, Washington DC society isn’t quite so pathetically narcissistic as his book implies.
Leibovich has a wicked sense of humor and writes with flair and aplomb. This Town is a wonderfully entertaining takedown on life among the members of “The Club”—those five or ten or twenty thousand people who circle around the bright flame of transient fame and find themselves in the Oval Office, on TV, or simply invited to the right parties. These are the best-known members of the media, the top lobbyists, the White House staffers, the more prominent members of the Senate and House, and, of course, the women who host the parties where they all rub shoulders, political party affiliation be damned.
As Leibovich points out archly in brief digressions from the arc of his tale, real-life events outside the Beltway actually do take place from time to time—the killing of Osama bin Laden, for example, or the partisan gridlock on the Federal budget—but these occurrences apparently aren’t important enough to The Club to cause them to do something life-changing such as canceling the White House Correspondents Annual Gala Weekend. (It appears from This Town that the bin Laden operation was actually postponed by a day because
White House staff suddenly remembered that the President would have to be at that dinner on its long-scheduled day.)
What you won’t find in This Town is any plausible explanation for why the US Government has become so dysfunctional. It’s a huge mistake, Leibovich implies, to explain Washington DC as a standoff between two bitterly opposed political parties. That misses the point “that the city, far from being hopelessly divided, is in fact hopelessly interconnected. It misses the degree to which New Media has democratized the political conversation while accentuating Washington’s insular, myopic, and self-loving tendencies. It misses, most of all, a full examination of how Washington may not serve the country well but has in fact worked splendidly for Washington itself—a city of beautifully busy people constantly writing the story of their own lives.”
To master such an inchoate mix of personalities, events, and fields of interest, Leibovich focuses his attention on certain key figures—people who may be virtually unknown to the rest of us but are objects of awe to the denizens of the District: “superlawyer” Bob Barnett, “superlobbyist” Jack Quinn, “superstaffer” Kurt Bardella, blogger Mike Allen (“’one of the defining journalists of this period’”), hostess Tammy Haddad, and a few others. Superlatives don’t suffice to describe the lofty achievements of these titans who roam so freely inside the Beltway.
You may not learn much about current affairs from reading This Town, but you’ll gain perspective on the insularity of life in our nation’s capital — and you’ll have a lot of fun along the way.
Here is Washington, DC, laid bare by the discerning eye and poison pen of The New York Times Magazine’s chief national correspondent there. If you think most of what takes place in the nation’s capital has little or nothing to do with anything outside the District of Columbia, well, it turns out you’re right.
“Getting rich has become the great bipartisan ideal,” writes Mark Leibovich. “’No Democrats and Republicans in Washington anymore, only millionaires,’ goes the maxim. The ultimate Green party. You still hear the term ‘public service’ thrown around, but often with irony and full knowledge that ‘self-service’ is now the real insider play.”
Never before, with the possible exception of Rome under the Emperor Nero or Paris under Louis XIV, have so many self-indulgent people come together in one place to flatter one another so effusively while concealing sharp knives in their purses or pockets. It’s a wonder, really, why Mark Leibovich still keeps his home there . . . unless, perhaps, Washington DC society isn’t quite so pathetically narcissistic as his book implies.
Leibovich has a wicked sense of humor and writes with flair and aplomb. This Town is a wonderfully entertaining takedown on life among the members of “The Club”—those five or ten or twenty thousand people who circle around the bright flame of transient fame and find themselves in the Oval Office, on TV, or simply invited to the right parties. These are the best-known members of the media, the top lobbyists, the White House staffers, the more prominent members of the Senate and House, and, of course, the women who host the parties where they all rub shoulders, political party affiliation be damned.
As Leibovich points out archly in brief digressions from the arc of his tale, real-life events outside the Beltway actually do take place from time to time—the killing of Osama bin Laden, for example, or the partisan gridlock on the Federal budget—but these occurrences apparently aren’t important enough to The Club to cause them to do something life-changing such as canceling the White House Correspondents Annual Gala Weekend. (It appears from This Town that the bin Laden operation was actually postponed by a day because
White House staff suddenly remembered that the President would have to be at that dinner on its long-scheduled day.)
What you won’t find in This Town is any plausible explanation for why the US Government has become so dysfunctional. It’s a huge mistake, Leibovich implies, to explain Washington DC as a standoff between two bitterly opposed political parties. That misses the point “that the city, far from being hopelessly divided, is in fact hopelessly interconnected. It misses the degree to which New Media has democratized the political conversation while accentuating Washington’s insular, myopic, and self-loving tendencies. It misses, most of all, a full examination of how Washington may not serve the country well but has in fact worked splendidly for Washington itself—a city of beautifully busy people constantly writing the story of their own lives.”
To master such an inchoate mix of personalities, events, and fields of interest, Leibovich focuses his attention on certain key figures—people who may be virtually unknown to the rest of us but are objects of awe to the denizens of the District: “superlawyer” Bob Barnett, “superlobbyist” Jack Quinn, “superstaffer” Kurt Bardella, blogger Mike Allen (“’one of the defining journalists of this period’”), hostess Tammy Haddad, and a few others. Superlatives don’t suffice to describe the lofty achievements of these titans who roam so freely inside the Beltway.
You may not learn much about current affairs from reading This Town, but you’ll gain perspective on the insularity of life in our nation’s capital — and you’ll have a lot of fun along the way.
September 12, 2013
It's entertaining, but a bit sprawling and uneven. Anything touching on Harry Reid is great and the chapter on Kurt Bardella, the Darrell Issa spokesperson, is a good example of the minimal long-term consequences that most bad behavior here actually entails.
What I wonder about is how much of the book's central arguments really are unique to Washington, or are they just more public because the social climbers and status-obsessed are purportedly public servants? It strikes me that the general elements of disgusting lavishness of rich people probably vary little across the country (though I supposed the degree of disgusting richness in say, Arkansas might look a little different).
The pursuit of prestige does feel a little bit different from how other cities operate. But that's only if you don't look at status as an alternative form of wealth. Type-A folks in New York can amass huge sums by working in finance, here people do it by building up their own "brands" or riding coattails of more powerful mentors. The major difference feels to me that again, we ascribe a sense that people engaging in public service operate under a more moralistic framework than those who do not.
That feels like a not unfair critique--if you build your prestige off the public dime, why should you get to cash that in and go work on K street? Among all the behaviors here, the revolving door type stuff felt to me like the most overtly awful and more unique to D.C. because of its locus of legislative and regulatory power.
This concept of cashing out is something I've thought a bit about personally after doing a stint in government. After my two years I went back to a roughly similar position to what I'd been in before I left--even at an organization I'd worked at before. But I did get a pay bump over what I'd been making before I went into government. Part of that surely is to recognize the additional knowledge I built up over that time, but I'm sure connections are part of that too. Was this unethical? I'm not sure. Part of me feels like no on the grounds that junior salaries in D.C. feel pretty depressed relative to other cities. But part of this being OK feels like it's because I'm not going out to lobby and am continuing to work on public policy analysis and not to vouch for smarmy clients on K street. But does that make it better or just make it better because it matches my belief system and I don't feel like I had to intellectually sell out?
What I wonder about is how much of the book's central arguments really are unique to Washington, or are they just more public because the social climbers and status-obsessed are purportedly public servants? It strikes me that the general elements of disgusting lavishness of rich people probably vary little across the country (though I supposed the degree of disgusting richness in say, Arkansas might look a little different).
The pursuit of prestige does feel a little bit different from how other cities operate. But that's only if you don't look at status as an alternative form of wealth. Type-A folks in New York can amass huge sums by working in finance, here people do it by building up their own "brands" or riding coattails of more powerful mentors. The major difference feels to me that again, we ascribe a sense that people engaging in public service operate under a more moralistic framework than those who do not.
That feels like a not unfair critique--if you build your prestige off the public dime, why should you get to cash that in and go work on K street? Among all the behaviors here, the revolving door type stuff felt to me like the most overtly awful and more unique to D.C. because of its locus of legislative and regulatory power.
This concept of cashing out is something I've thought a bit about personally after doing a stint in government. After my two years I went back to a roughly similar position to what I'd been in before I left--even at an organization I'd worked at before. But I did get a pay bump over what I'd been making before I went into government. Part of that surely is to recognize the additional knowledge I built up over that time, but I'm sure connections are part of that too. Was this unethical? I'm not sure. Part of me feels like no on the grounds that junior salaries in D.C. feel pretty depressed relative to other cities. But part of this being OK feels like it's because I'm not going out to lobby and am continuing to work on public policy analysis and not to vouch for smarmy clients on K street. But does that make it better or just make it better because it matches my belief system and I don't feel like I had to intellectually sell out?
October 23, 2014
"This Town" made me sad. I enjoyed reading it but towards the end, as all the incestuous relationships between lobbyists, media celebrities, politicians and random offensively rich people pile up and up to create a mountain of human filth, and you realize THESE are the people who really run the country, I just wanted it to be over.
The saddest part for me is that I really can't see this going any other way. It's like reading a science fiction novel about people killing homeless people to feed to rich people's dogs and thinking "Well, if this is the logic our society is beginning to live by, then why not?" I say this because the Supreme Court deemed that money is speech and corporations know damn well that a few million in lobbying/campaign contributions can mean earning billions with government contracts or avoiding new regulations that will lower their stock price by cutting into their precious profits, how could our government not rapidly devolve into a high-spender whorehouse where everyone with so much as a single string to pull in D.C. is looking to get paid off? It's just human nature.
I'll go one step further and say that soon even the journalists will be whittled down to only the gossipy, partisan and/or ego-massaging types who either don't give a care about any particular political belief but rather are always just looking for the best party invitations that will get them introduced to someone that can get them into the next big party or a cushy new job at a higher pay grade.
Meanwhile, as all this money gets sucked into Washington like a black hole whose core is greed and gluttony, our schools go underfunded, our infrastructure falls into decay and people who make minimum wage have minor medical conditions that result in tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills that will never be repaid. Best and greatest chance for democracy? Yeah right, just keep telling yourselves that, America.
The saddest part for me is that I really can't see this going any other way. It's like reading a science fiction novel about people killing homeless people to feed to rich people's dogs and thinking "Well, if this is the logic our society is beginning to live by, then why not?" I say this because the Supreme Court deemed that money is speech and corporations know damn well that a few million in lobbying/campaign contributions can mean earning billions with government contracts or avoiding new regulations that will lower their stock price by cutting into their precious profits, how could our government not rapidly devolve into a high-spender whorehouse where everyone with so much as a single string to pull in D.C. is looking to get paid off? It's just human nature.
I'll go one step further and say that soon even the journalists will be whittled down to only the gossipy, partisan and/or ego-massaging types who either don't give a care about any particular political belief but rather are always just looking for the best party invitations that will get them introduced to someone that can get them into the next big party or a cushy new job at a higher pay grade.
Meanwhile, as all this money gets sucked into Washington like a black hole whose core is greed and gluttony, our schools go underfunded, our infrastructure falls into decay and people who make minimum wage have minor medical conditions that result in tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills that will never be repaid. Best and greatest chance for democracy? Yeah right, just keep telling yourselves that, America.
August 26, 2013
I liked This Town because it's full of snarky comments, insider stories, dishing on the famous and wanna-be famous; and oh yes, there are also a few insights into Washington and how it works (or doesn't). Everyone--except Ben Bradlee and some of Leibovich's NY Times colleagues--gets ripped for their vain, insecure, solipsistic view of the world...their shallow (or nonexistent) values...their conflicts of interest...their ladder climbing...and their passing through the revolving doors of politics into lobbying (or public relations or cable guru land). Everyone wants to be a player, and they all spend most of their time trying to become one.
Not only did I enjoy the book, but I feel it is well written too. The take downs of the funerals and parties are detailed and full of telling quotes. Though the story hops from person to person (and vignette to vignette), I never felt lost, and the book provides a broad arc from Russert's funeral to Bradlee/Quinn's "last party." Throughout it all, Leibovich leavens his snark with some self deprecation (perhaps thrown in intentionally for self protection), and he does have some awareness that he and his book are very much part of the scene too.
So I liked the book, and I believe it is well written. What does that say about me? Am I even worse than the Washington insiders for feeling above them all? Am I even more self absorbed for considering how a positive review will reflect on me? Who knows! For now, I'll save my self judgment and self absorption for another day. And for now, I'll just say This Town is a good read.
Note. Feel free to ignore the last paragraph. After reading This Town, I figure I better work on my humblebragging if I'm ever going to get anywhere.
Not only did I enjoy the book, but I feel it is well written too. The take downs of the funerals and parties are detailed and full of telling quotes. Though the story hops from person to person (and vignette to vignette), I never felt lost, and the book provides a broad arc from Russert's funeral to Bradlee/Quinn's "last party." Throughout it all, Leibovich leavens his snark with some self deprecation (perhaps thrown in intentionally for self protection), and he does have some awareness that he and his book are very much part of the scene too.
So I liked the book, and I believe it is well written. What does that say about me? Am I even worse than the Washington insiders for feeling above them all? Am I even more self absorbed for considering how a positive review will reflect on me? Who knows! For now, I'll save my self judgment and self absorption for another day. And for now, I'll just say This Town is a good read.
Note. Feel free to ignore the last paragraph. After reading This Town, I figure I better work on my humblebragging if I'm ever going to get anywhere.
October 6, 2013
I heard/watched a couple of author interviews re this book. Being suspicious of its value I picked it up from the library.
I read the first 3 chapters or so, about 100 pages. Having done so I am done. What a sad book.
I know there is a knowing cynicism about "This Town" that just rolls with all the shallow, unprincipled dealings of those powerful people who have become our ostensible leaders.
Far from being interesting this book confirmed to me the underlying nature of what it is that is broken about or national discourse. We are governed not so much by principle as mandarins who themselves are driven by ego needs far more than any principle - much less any idealistic ideals about doing good as defined as anything greater than ones self and ones self aggrandizement.
So. We have venality in the corridors of power. Who could have possibly have known. (The mantra of the Bush era!). Reading this book is not so much a revelation of anything interesting but a glossy voyeuristic exercise only better than the National Enquirer due to its pedigree.
Maybe it gets better later in the book. I doubt it. I remember the interview on the Daily Show where the author was not allowed to be glib and "knowing". It was interesting watching him attempt to justify himself, and his class, by this facile acknowledgement of how flawed it all is.
But neither the acknowledgement, nor the information in this book, give anything like insight or understanding about what to do next. If anything. And maybe that is the takeaway from this book : Don't expect anything to change. Those in power live and work to sustain their power, all other considerations are secondary.
Did we need this tabloid of a book to know that?
I read the first 3 chapters or so, about 100 pages. Having done so I am done. What a sad book.
I know there is a knowing cynicism about "This Town" that just rolls with all the shallow, unprincipled dealings of those powerful people who have become our ostensible leaders.
Far from being interesting this book confirmed to me the underlying nature of what it is that is broken about or national discourse. We are governed not so much by principle as mandarins who themselves are driven by ego needs far more than any principle - much less any idealistic ideals about doing good as defined as anything greater than ones self and ones self aggrandizement.
So. We have venality in the corridors of power. Who could have possibly have known. (The mantra of the Bush era!). Reading this book is not so much a revelation of anything interesting but a glossy voyeuristic exercise only better than the National Enquirer due to its pedigree.
Maybe it gets better later in the book. I doubt it. I remember the interview on the Daily Show where the author was not allowed to be glib and "knowing". It was interesting watching him attempt to justify himself, and his class, by this facile acknowledgement of how flawed it all is.
But neither the acknowledgement, nor the information in this book, give anything like insight or understanding about what to do next. If anything. And maybe that is the takeaway from this book : Don't expect anything to change. Those in power live and work to sustain their power, all other considerations are secondary.
Did we need this tabloid of a book to know that?
February 1, 2014
I didn't exactly hate this book, but I would've never finished it without the pressure of my book club behind it. Mark Leibovich is a good writer, and parts of this unsurprising "exposé" made me snicker. The humor is mostly of the cruel kind, like telling us that Harry Reid has "all the magnetism of a dried snail" - which I admit made me laugh - mostly because of the descriptive accuracy. Leibovich is a genius at caricature, reminding me very much of Jon Stewart's daily roast of political idiots.
I learned a few things, well, mostly because I'm not in the "inner circle" of "This Town." The background of Mike (Mikey) Allen of Politico/Playbook was interesting........as was the sick, twisted nature of the relationship between reporters and politicians. The hyper-unreality of it all is compared to Facebook and high school. Not what you want to hear about the people who run our country. Even worse is their attitude about the American voter. Yeah, you Stupid! I like Jason Linkins's distillation of a Tom Jensen story for Politico (one about stupid people); he says that Jensen believes that "the electorate is 'made up of a big shambling pack of helpless dumbasses, who would obviously be utterly adrift in their hopeless lives without Politico being around to occasionally mansplain things to them." I laughed. Then I thought, fuck you Politico/Congress/US Government. Then I sighed.
Other than this, I am left with nothing but a feeling of emptiness. What can one say? The space occupied by politicians, pundits, reporters, and hostesses is located inside one giant feverishly sweaty spin room. Overhead are balloons and to the side of the dais there's a little band. Ted Nugent is not playing.
I learned a few things, well, mostly because I'm not in the "inner circle" of "This Town." The background of Mike (Mikey) Allen of Politico/Playbook was interesting........as was the sick, twisted nature of the relationship between reporters and politicians. The hyper-unreality of it all is compared to Facebook and high school. Not what you want to hear about the people who run our country. Even worse is their attitude about the American voter. Yeah, you Stupid! I like Jason Linkins's distillation of a Tom Jensen story for Politico (one about stupid people); he says that Jensen believes that "the electorate is 'made up of a big shambling pack of helpless dumbasses, who would obviously be utterly adrift in their hopeless lives without Politico being around to occasionally mansplain things to them." I laughed. Then I thought, fuck you Politico/Congress/US Government. Then I sighed.
Other than this, I am left with nothing but a feeling of emptiness. What can one say? The space occupied by politicians, pundits, reporters, and hostesses is located inside one giant feverishly sweaty spin room. Overhead are balloons and to the side of the dais there's a little band. Ted Nugent is not playing.
May 14, 2015
If you follow the politcal process at all this book will confirm your worst fears while making you laugh outloud. If you are interested in our national government you will love this book. Leibovich lets you in on all the inside jokes and behind the scenes manueverings of the 500 in Washington that run the country. The front men may change (Clinton to Bush to Obama), but all the power brokers remain the same. Senators becom lobbyists become cabinet officials become media consultants become talk show hosts. The names don't change, just their current job. The media are more like lapdogs than watchdogs, conflicts of interest don't raise eyebrows, and you really can't tell the difference between the parties--the only difference worth noting is those in and those out. Once you're in you are in for life.
Starting with Tim Russert's funeral and the public mourning and jockeying for his coveted position through the power wielded by the Washington socialites, we see that the sausage-making of government is truly disgusting at times. Of course the beauty of this book is the insights are liberally sprinkled with insider stories that are hysterically funny (one example--being interviewed by one journalist was a little like having a light enema) and I will not look at the Correspondents dinner, the Sunday mornings new shows, or any of the talking heads the same way again.
Starting with Tim Russert's funeral and the public mourning and jockeying for his coveted position through the power wielded by the Washington socialites, we see that the sausage-making of government is truly disgusting at times. Of course the beauty of this book is the insights are liberally sprinkled with insider stories that are hysterically funny (one example--being interviewed by one journalist was a little like having a light enema) and I will not look at the Correspondents dinner, the Sunday mornings new shows, or any of the talking heads the same way again.
September 12, 2013
A snarky, funny, and sobering read about the revolving "media industrial complex" that is pervasive in DC. Looking at the three major occupations in the power triangle of politics, media, and lobbyists, Leibovich shows how people never leave Washington but rather migrate from one to another to make BIG money and gain power. Oh and there is no need to be successful at any of the jobs in order to cash in either. The book is full of stories of someone causing a huge scandal and then ending up on his/her feet in a few weeks with a cushy and often more lucrative job. Your party affiliation also has no direct impact on your earning potential either. Rather it is the 'branding" of your personality and your willingness to demonstrate an idealogical flexibility when it comes to your position on issues. What kept me going through this repulsive and horrific show of greed, wealth, and crassness were the snarky comments that really made me laugh. ("The president's stump speeches could carry the forced air of a Van Halen reunion tour with Sammy Hagar in for David Lee Roth.") A must read for anyone who is thinking of majoring in political science!
August 7, 2013
Politics as usual, or as they've been in the last few decades. Nothing surprising here. Sell-outs, etc. Interesting look into DC (what I consider my "other" hometown) and how it's evolved from a place corporations ignore to one they court. It is frustrating to confirm so strongly that politics is exactly that - politics. It's not "public service" or "trying to make a difference" or any of it. Will it ever change? The answer is no. Though it left me wondering if my company should employ a lobbyist.
Anyway, there's no real narrative and it feels kind of all over the place, though it starts with Tim Russert's funeral, which engaged me immediately. Side note, Russert HATED the Clintons, which makes you wonder. There is snark and some good tidbits. There is a large portion that crosses over into San Diego politics which, as a San Diegan, was interesting to me but might not be for the general population. The author's style is fun and engaging. Overall a good read.
Anyway, there's no real narrative and it feels kind of all over the place, though it starts with Tim Russert's funeral, which engaged me immediately. Side note, Russert HATED the Clintons, which makes you wonder. There is snark and some good tidbits. There is a large portion that crosses over into San Diego politics which, as a San Diegan, was interesting to me but might not be for the general population. The author's style is fun and engaging. Overall a good read.
September 6, 2013
Mildly entertaining-- mostly unbearably smug. Leibovich decries DC as a power-mad name-dropping "suck up city" which of course it is but his familiarity and connections come off as more humble braggy and less qualified observery. And while I profess no affection for them, the cheap jabs at Trent Lott (southern accents are funny!) and Chris Christie (fat people are lazy!) are cringe-worthy.
Funnily enough, he spends more than a few pages talking about the success of Game Change (a far superior book) and how DC dismissed it as mere gossip-- almost like he's trying to stave off criticism of this book by putting it in the same category. But it ain't changing no game. I'm sorry to say: you can pass on this one.
Funnily enough, he spends more than a few pages talking about the success of Game Change (a far superior book) and how DC dismissed it as mere gossip-- almost like he's trying to stave off criticism of this book by putting it in the same category. But it ain't changing no game. I'm sorry to say: you can pass on this one.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 928 reviews