What do you think?
Rate this book
Language Intelligence: Lessons on Persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga
Language Intelligence[Lessons on Persuasion from Jesus Shakespeare Lincoln and Lady Gaga] [LANGUAGE INTELLIGENCE] [Paperback]
230 pages, Paperback
First published July 11, 2012
69 people are currently reading
786 people want to read
About the author
Joseph J. Romm
15 books10 followersDr. Joseph Romm is the editor of Climate Progress and a Senior Fellow at the American Progress. In 2009, Time magazine named him one of the “Heroes of the Environment″ and “The Web’s most influential climate-change blogger.”
Romm was Acting Assistant Secretary of Energy for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy during the Clinton Administration where he directed $1 billion in research, development, demonstration, and deployment of clean energy and carbon-mitigating technology. He holds a Ph.D. in physics from MIT. In 2008, Romm was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science for “distinguished service toward a sustainable energy future and for persuasive discourse on why citizens, corporations, and governments should adopt sustainable technologies.”
In 2007, TIME named Climate Progress one of the “Top 15 Green Websites,” writing that “Romm occupies the intersection of climate science, economics and policy…. On his blog and in his most recent book, Hell and High Water, you can find some of the most cogent, memorable, and deployable arguments for immediate and overwhelming action to confront global warming.” In 2009, Rolling Stone named Romm #88 on its list of The 100 “people who are reinventing America” calling him “America’s fiercest climate-change activist-blogger.”
In March 2009, The New York Times‘ Tom Friedman wrote that Romm is “a physicist and climate expert who writes the indispensable blog climateprogress.org.” In April, U.S. News & World Report named Romm one of the 8 “most influential energy and environmental policymakers in the Obama era,” writing, “In terms of his cachet in the blogosphere, Joe Romm is something like the climate change equivalent of economist (and New York Times columnist) Paul Krugman.”
Romm was Acting Assistant Secretary of Energy for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy during the Clinton Administration where he directed $1 billion in research, development, demonstration, and deployment of clean energy and carbon-mitigating technology. He holds a Ph.D. in physics from MIT. In 2008, Romm was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science for “distinguished service toward a sustainable energy future and for persuasive discourse on why citizens, corporations, and governments should adopt sustainable technologies.”
In 2007, TIME named Climate Progress one of the “Top 15 Green Websites,” writing that “Romm occupies the intersection of climate science, economics and policy…. On his blog and in his most recent book, Hell and High Water, you can find some of the most cogent, memorable, and deployable arguments for immediate and overwhelming action to confront global warming.” In 2009, Rolling Stone named Romm #88 on its list of The 100 “people who are reinventing America” calling him “America’s fiercest climate-change activist-blogger.”
In March 2009, The New York Times‘ Tom Friedman wrote that Romm is “a physicist and climate expert who writes the indispensable blog climateprogress.org.” In April, U.S. News & World Report named Romm one of the 8 “most influential energy and environmental policymakers in the Obama era,” writing, “In terms of his cachet in the blogosphere, Joe Romm is something like the climate change equivalent of economist (and New York Times columnist) Paul Krugman.”
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews
July 14, 2019
Some notes to remember :
"1. If you’ve ever had to deal with a grumpy toddler, you’ll know that one no is never enough. You’ve got to say it again and again and again, until the negation finally sinks in.
It’s exactly the same with adults. Just like children, we learn and remember through repetition.
2. Metaphors are powerful figures of speech that mirror structures in the human brain.
3. To be sure, metaphors trump similes.
When we tell someone that she’s sweet as honey, it may make an impression, but saying that she is our honey is stronger still.
4. If a simple metaphor can create one vivid picture, an extended metaphor can generate a cascade of images.
5. But these metaphors should be coherent. The Democrats learned this lesson in the 2004 presidential campaign against George W. Bush.
They made the mistake of attempting to portray Bush as both stupid and cunning.
6. Indeed, the dark side of rhetoric was already well known in classical Athens. The Sophists were a group who prided themselves on their ability to make weak arguments seem strong by using rhetorical techniques.
7. Hogan found that if a salesperson told people not to feel pressured to buy anything, they'd end up purchasing items. Even telling them that they needn’t make a decision, or cautioning them not to make up their minds too fast, had a positive effect.
"
"1. If you’ve ever had to deal with a grumpy toddler, you’ll know that one no is never enough. You’ve got to say it again and again and again, until the negation finally sinks in.
It’s exactly the same with adults. Just like children, we learn and remember through repetition.
2. Metaphors are powerful figures of speech that mirror structures in the human brain.
3. To be sure, metaphors trump similes.
When we tell someone that she’s sweet as honey, it may make an impression, but saying that she is our honey is stronger still.
4. If a simple metaphor can create one vivid picture, an extended metaphor can generate a cascade of images.
5. But these metaphors should be coherent. The Democrats learned this lesson in the 2004 presidential campaign against George W. Bush.
They made the mistake of attempting to portray Bush as both stupid and cunning.
6. Indeed, the dark side of rhetoric was already well known in classical Athens. The Sophists were a group who prided themselves on their ability to make weak arguments seem strong by using rhetorical techniques.
7. Hogan found that if a salesperson told people not to feel pressured to buy anything, they'd end up purchasing items. Even telling them that they needn’t make a decision, or cautioning them not to make up their minds too fast, had a positive effect.
"
January 25, 2016
Joseph J. Romm’s Language Intelligence gives a brief survey of Western rhetoric, tossing classic figures like Jesus and Shakespeare together with contemporaries like George W. Bush and Lady Gaga. The book is designed to help writers “become more persuasive, more memorable, and harder to manipulate” (vii). While I think Romm achieves this to an extent, I also had a decidedly negative reaction to his approach.
I probably disliked this book more than it deserves. Romm seems like a smart guy, and I give him major kudos for supporting the climate change movement with his blog, ClimateProgress.org. He has a keen understanding of persuasive strategies and uses examples that effectively explain their functions. His chapters on metaphor and extended metaphor are particularly solid, though I’d still recommend Johnson and Lakoff’s Metaphors We Live By––a book Romm cites once or twice––as a more substantive substitute. Romm’s examinations of modern political rhetoric are also fascinating, although I often disagreed with his interpretations.
My main problem with this book is its subdued ambitions. “Language intelligence is the key to creating and sustaining a memorable brand,” Romm writes in his conclusion. “If you are wittier on Twitter and have headier headlines, then I have succeeded” (176). I can’t say this book won’t help some readers achieve those goals, but I have to question their underlying value. Perhaps Romm’s success within the current status quo has blinded him to the reality that we need media that is more challenging and more complex, not just a reminder that repetition helps if you want to make your message stick.
I expected a lot more from a book called Language Intelligence, but Romm seems content to offer a set of tools for pandering to the lowest common denominator of Internet users. This book isn’t really about how to use language intelligently; it’s about how to get what you want when intelligence is in short supply.
A major red flag is the Romm’s relentlessly quantitative perspective. “The need to fill up a twenty-four-hour news cycle and the ever-growing number of media outlets means the only way to get a message out is to shout it over and over again,” Romm claims (33). This is not a false statement, but it reveals a critical bias: for Romm, being a successful blogger is about being noticed, about web traffic and retweets. It’s about quantity, not quality. If you’re concerned with producing quality work that will attract a quality audience, this book is not for you.
Romm has lots to say about how to fashion pithy headlines and catchy slogans. He says almost nothing about how to make an extended argument supported by appropriate evidence, find your voice, or develop an aesthetic relationship with the act of writing. He seems to think that the size of your audience should outweigh your emotional relationship with your writing. He characterizes rhetoric as an objective tool that exerts equal influence on all humans, regardless of context or education. You can pick it up and watch your numbers soar, or leave it and learn to be content with obscurity.
Nothing illustrates this more clearly than Romm’s obsequious treatment of Lady Gaga. He points out with reverence that Gaga “is the first musician in history to hit one billion views on YouTube,” as if YouTube has been used since the beginning of time to rate humanity’s most important artistic endeavors (30). Romm infantilizes the reader by explaining that lines like “I’ll get him hot, show him what I’ve got” are designed to be seductive, and how Gaga’s lubricious hit “Poker Face” makes magnificent use of “multiple layers” and contains a “deeper meaning” (171-2). Meanwhile, musicians all over the world are creating genuinely valuable and interesting works of art. They just don’t have enough YouTube hits to show up on Romm’s radar.
Given how much time Romm spends analyzing Shakespeare, Lincoln, and other well-deserving rhetorical heavyweights, it might seem queer that he would praise such shallow music. But shallow art is perhaps most likely to fit into Romm’s model of success; much of Language Intelligence gives the impression that something mediocre can be made great with the right rhetorical tweaks. And while that may sometimes be the case, such an ethos isn’t exactly a recipe for informative and vibrant media.
Another oversight is Romm’s failure to acknowledge that the effectiveness of rhetorical strategies always depends on the intelligence of a particular audience. If your audience is impatient and superficial, then gussied up language will be enough to string them along. But if your audience is educated and informed, they’ll be reading for content and consistency, not fluff. Romm claims that “facts cannot fight false frames,” but that’s simply not true for many readers (139).
If you’re trained to value facts and deconstruct frames, facts can win the day. All writers use frames, but we regularly use facts to revise old frames or generate new frames that improve understanding and reflect existing conditions with better accuracy. How could this be so if frames always trump facts? Additionally, there’s no reason why complexity can’t be just as seductive as sound bites, or even moreso. Many writers explain facts with clarity and eloquence, enticing readers to face complicated realities rather than ignore them (e.g. anything by Carl Sagan, Edward O. Wilson, Oliver Sacks, Antonio Damasio, or countless other naturalist writers).
Romm doesn’t seem to understand just how much a decent education changes one’s interactions with the modern media. He portrays conniving politicians and advertisers as “ultra-subtle and ultra-sophisticated seducers” who dominate us with their inimitable rhetorical chops (145). This is a straw man. The truth is that anyone equipped with the right analytical skills will see through most (not all) rhetorical window-dressing. Sadly, your average Internet user doesn’t qualify. To its credit, Language Intelligence contains a chapter devoted to rectifying this problem. Romm’s dominant message, however, is that the only way to overcome deceptive and reductive rhetoric is with rhetoric that is equally deceptive and reductive, but aligned with the “correct” perspectives and values.
Romm wants us to think we’re in an arms race with rhetorical geniuses, and the only way to fight back is to get just as good as they are at fooling people and oversimplifying complex issues: “You must fight metaphorical fire with metaphorical fire” (139). We can win some battles that way, to be sure. But the war will be won when people start demanding better content, not better quips. We should focus on creating a media landscape where good rhetoricians are less effective across the board. Trying to beat them at their own game will only degrade our public discourse further.
This review was originally published on my blog, words&dirt.
I probably disliked this book more than it deserves. Romm seems like a smart guy, and I give him major kudos for supporting the climate change movement with his blog, ClimateProgress.org. He has a keen understanding of persuasive strategies and uses examples that effectively explain their functions. His chapters on metaphor and extended metaphor are particularly solid, though I’d still recommend Johnson and Lakoff’s Metaphors We Live By––a book Romm cites once or twice––as a more substantive substitute. Romm’s examinations of modern political rhetoric are also fascinating, although I often disagreed with his interpretations.
My main problem with this book is its subdued ambitions. “Language intelligence is the key to creating and sustaining a memorable brand,” Romm writes in his conclusion. “If you are wittier on Twitter and have headier headlines, then I have succeeded” (176). I can’t say this book won’t help some readers achieve those goals, but I have to question their underlying value. Perhaps Romm’s success within the current status quo has blinded him to the reality that we need media that is more challenging and more complex, not just a reminder that repetition helps if you want to make your message stick.
I expected a lot more from a book called Language Intelligence, but Romm seems content to offer a set of tools for pandering to the lowest common denominator of Internet users. This book isn’t really about how to use language intelligently; it’s about how to get what you want when intelligence is in short supply.
A major red flag is the Romm’s relentlessly quantitative perspective. “The need to fill up a twenty-four-hour news cycle and the ever-growing number of media outlets means the only way to get a message out is to shout it over and over again,” Romm claims (33). This is not a false statement, but it reveals a critical bias: for Romm, being a successful blogger is about being noticed, about web traffic and retweets. It’s about quantity, not quality. If you’re concerned with producing quality work that will attract a quality audience, this book is not for you.
Romm has lots to say about how to fashion pithy headlines and catchy slogans. He says almost nothing about how to make an extended argument supported by appropriate evidence, find your voice, or develop an aesthetic relationship with the act of writing. He seems to think that the size of your audience should outweigh your emotional relationship with your writing. He characterizes rhetoric as an objective tool that exerts equal influence on all humans, regardless of context or education. You can pick it up and watch your numbers soar, or leave it and learn to be content with obscurity.
Nothing illustrates this more clearly than Romm’s obsequious treatment of Lady Gaga. He points out with reverence that Gaga “is the first musician in history to hit one billion views on YouTube,” as if YouTube has been used since the beginning of time to rate humanity’s most important artistic endeavors (30). Romm infantilizes the reader by explaining that lines like “I’ll get him hot, show him what I’ve got” are designed to be seductive, and how Gaga’s lubricious hit “Poker Face” makes magnificent use of “multiple layers” and contains a “deeper meaning” (171-2). Meanwhile, musicians all over the world are creating genuinely valuable and interesting works of art. They just don’t have enough YouTube hits to show up on Romm’s radar.
Given how much time Romm spends analyzing Shakespeare, Lincoln, and other well-deserving rhetorical heavyweights, it might seem queer that he would praise such shallow music. But shallow art is perhaps most likely to fit into Romm’s model of success; much of Language Intelligence gives the impression that something mediocre can be made great with the right rhetorical tweaks. And while that may sometimes be the case, such an ethos isn’t exactly a recipe for informative and vibrant media.
Another oversight is Romm’s failure to acknowledge that the effectiveness of rhetorical strategies always depends on the intelligence of a particular audience. If your audience is impatient and superficial, then gussied up language will be enough to string them along. But if your audience is educated and informed, they’ll be reading for content and consistency, not fluff. Romm claims that “facts cannot fight false frames,” but that’s simply not true for many readers (139).
If you’re trained to value facts and deconstruct frames, facts can win the day. All writers use frames, but we regularly use facts to revise old frames or generate new frames that improve understanding and reflect existing conditions with better accuracy. How could this be so if frames always trump facts? Additionally, there’s no reason why complexity can’t be just as seductive as sound bites, or even moreso. Many writers explain facts with clarity and eloquence, enticing readers to face complicated realities rather than ignore them (e.g. anything by Carl Sagan, Edward O. Wilson, Oliver Sacks, Antonio Damasio, or countless other naturalist writers).
Romm doesn’t seem to understand just how much a decent education changes one’s interactions with the modern media. He portrays conniving politicians and advertisers as “ultra-subtle and ultra-sophisticated seducers” who dominate us with their inimitable rhetorical chops (145). This is a straw man. The truth is that anyone equipped with the right analytical skills will see through most (not all) rhetorical window-dressing. Sadly, your average Internet user doesn’t qualify. To its credit, Language Intelligence contains a chapter devoted to rectifying this problem. Romm’s dominant message, however, is that the only way to overcome deceptive and reductive rhetoric is with rhetoric that is equally deceptive and reductive, but aligned with the “correct” perspectives and values.
Romm wants us to think we’re in an arms race with rhetorical geniuses, and the only way to fight back is to get just as good as they are at fooling people and oversimplifying complex issues: “You must fight metaphorical fire with metaphorical fire” (139). We can win some battles that way, to be sure. But the war will be won when people start demanding better content, not better quips. We should focus on creating a media landscape where good rhetoricians are less effective across the board. Trying to beat them at their own game will only degrade our public discourse further.
This review was originally published on my blog, words&dirt.
December 1, 2020
The art of rhetoric
September 9, 2012
I had an ongoing argument with a therapist I did some copy editing for. He thought his audience was composed of normal humans who might want therapy, but his articles were written in pretentious academic speak. If I ever come in contact with that fellow again, I'll recommend this book to him.
Romm talks about rhetoric and how modern politicians lack the skill. I got so jazzed reading this book that I printed out the Gettysburg address and did my own counting and analysis.
Romm talks about rhetoric and how modern politicians lack the skill. I got so jazzed reading this book that I printed out the Gettysburg address and did my own counting and analysis.
August 15, 2012
I just bought and read the Kindle version of Joe Romm's new book on rhetoric "Language Intelligence".
He has persuaded me to pay more attention to headlines. For one, from this post on, I will go with the convention of beginning all words in the headline with capital characters.
The book tells people how to write and speak better. I learned that Joe Romm doesn't write his "Climate Progress" blog. He dictates all of his blog posts (and all his books) using voice recognition software (location 108).
I don't do that. But I can still use most of the principles Romm explains.
For example, repetition. I used that in the headline here.
And the use of metaphors. I just built myself a new one yesterday (before reading the book). Another strong metaphor would be "asteroid impact". I will post an excerpt from "Great News" using that right after this.
Romm mentions the "baseball player on steroids" metaphor. He somehow fails to mention the "loaded dice".
And the whole book lacks a chapter dedicated to putting all the abstract concepts in it to use for climate change activism. What exactly is the most effective "extended metaphor" or "frame" for this issue?
Readers are left on their own finding the answer to that.
A pretty large part of the discussion uses examples from the Bible, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga to explain the concepts.
As Romm shows, the Bible uses effective language. There is a reason it is the most printed book ever and has survived many centuries.
That in turn means that people studying the Bible will, on average, be more effective in their communications. That may be a strategic advantage of the religious right in the United States.
Romm gives conflicting goals for his writing the book. At location 2033, he writes:
"My goal has been to help you become more persuasive and less seducible. If you have already begun to speak differently and listen differently after reading this book, then I have succeeded. If you are wittier on Twitter and have headier headlines, then I have succeeded."
That goal is at best neutral in the climate change debate, since "you" in the above paragraph can be readers on either side. It might actually be an own goal. The opposition pays more attention to these matters in the first place and therefore may be expected to profit more from the excellent teaching in this book.
In contrast, the last paragraph of the "Afterword" reads:
"I did not write this book expecting to end the debasement of the political language, but rather to give rhetorical ammunition to those fighting the good fight in the face of the fiercest foes."
That would indicate that Romm is not trying to help everybody (including fossil fuel propaganda peddlers), but only climate activists.
Is such a thing possible? Can anyone write a book that improves the "language intelligence" of climate activists while leaving that of their opponents unchanged?
It could be done. All one would need to do is apply the principles developed in this book to climate activism. For starters, show what the most effective "extended metaphor" or "frame" for the issue is.
(Also published on Lenz Blog today).
He has persuaded me to pay more attention to headlines. For one, from this post on, I will go with the convention of beginning all words in the headline with capital characters.
The book tells people how to write and speak better. I learned that Joe Romm doesn't write his "Climate Progress" blog. He dictates all of his blog posts (and all his books) using voice recognition software (location 108).
I don't do that. But I can still use most of the principles Romm explains.
For example, repetition. I used that in the headline here.
And the use of metaphors. I just built myself a new one yesterday (before reading the book). Another strong metaphor would be "asteroid impact". I will post an excerpt from "Great News" using that right after this.
Romm mentions the "baseball player on steroids" metaphor. He somehow fails to mention the "loaded dice".
And the whole book lacks a chapter dedicated to putting all the abstract concepts in it to use for climate change activism. What exactly is the most effective "extended metaphor" or "frame" for this issue?
Readers are left on their own finding the answer to that.
A pretty large part of the discussion uses examples from the Bible, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga to explain the concepts.
As Romm shows, the Bible uses effective language. There is a reason it is the most printed book ever and has survived many centuries.
That in turn means that people studying the Bible will, on average, be more effective in their communications. That may be a strategic advantage of the religious right in the United States.
Romm gives conflicting goals for his writing the book. At location 2033, he writes:
"My goal has been to help you become more persuasive and less seducible. If you have already begun to speak differently and listen differently after reading this book, then I have succeeded. If you are wittier on Twitter and have headier headlines, then I have succeeded."
That goal is at best neutral in the climate change debate, since "you" in the above paragraph can be readers on either side. It might actually be an own goal. The opposition pays more attention to these matters in the first place and therefore may be expected to profit more from the excellent teaching in this book.
In contrast, the last paragraph of the "Afterword" reads:
"I did not write this book expecting to end the debasement of the political language, but rather to give rhetorical ammunition to those fighting the good fight in the face of the fiercest foes."
That would indicate that Romm is not trying to help everybody (including fossil fuel propaganda peddlers), but only climate activists.
Is such a thing possible? Can anyone write a book that improves the "language intelligence" of climate activists while leaving that of their opponents unchanged?
It could be done. All one would need to do is apply the principles developed in this book to climate activism. For starters, show what the most effective "extended metaphor" or "frame" for the issue is.
(Also published on Lenz Blog today).
April 27, 2015
This is an excellent little book. It is a modern primer on rhetoric, the art of persuasive speech and writing. It examines political speech, dramas, opinion pieces, etc., in the light of figures of speech -- metaphor, rhyme, repetition, alliteration, saying something without actually saying, etc. It explains why Republicans are better at messaging than Democrats, why scientists often lose in the court of public opinion even when the facts are on their side, how salepeople pressure you by telling you they aren't going to pressure you, etc. This book is particularly useful to writers and public speakers, but I think it ought to be read by listeners, too. A lot of people wouldn't eat a hotdog if they knew how it was made; perhaps they would reject bad arguments if they knew how those were made, too.
August 21, 2012
Nicely done and I highly recommend to the science-minded. For our generation those who are in climate science or understand the threat of global warming need to improve their rhetoric NOW. Finding out what is true is only half the journey, while showing others why what you found is important is what finally brings the discovery home.
September 19, 2012
Being an English major, an English teacher, currently writing a novel, and teaching communications as well, I am familiar with tactics of persuasion, but Romm helped to freshen up my understanding by providing cogent examples in classical and contemporary life. The manner of presentation and approach brought these important methods of communication up to date.
July 14, 2019
why you need to master rhetoric if you want to sell something;
• why George W. Bush is a gifted speaker; and
• why Lady Gaga is the queen of pop rhetoric.
• why George W. Bush is a gifted speaker; and
• why Lady Gaga is the queen of pop rhetoric.
July 15, 2019
I read this book thanks to Blinkist.
The key message in this book:
Rhetoric isn’t a forgotten art that’s confined to old dusty historical and literary books. It’s still here today, even if it often goes unnoticed. Whether you want to sing a pop song, tell people about climate change or convince a person of your deep love, you can put rhetoric to use.
Actionable advice:
Analyse the information you receive
Next time you hear a politician speak, don’t just buy the message. Instead, analyze the speech. What rhetorical tricks did the politician use? Why? Once you’ve seen through what the politician wanted you to believe, you’ll hopefully have a clearer idea of what is actually at stake.
Suggested further reading:
Through the Language Glass by Guy Deutscher
Through the Language Glass (2010) explores the many ways in which language both reflects and influences our culture. By exploring the different ways that languages deal with space, gender and color, the book demonstrates just how fundamentally the language you speak alters your perception of the world.
The key message in this book:
Rhetoric isn’t a forgotten art that’s confined to old dusty historical and literary books. It’s still here today, even if it often goes unnoticed. Whether you want to sing a pop song, tell people about climate change or convince a person of your deep love, you can put rhetoric to use.
Actionable advice:
Analyse the information you receive
Next time you hear a politician speak, don’t just buy the message. Instead, analyze the speech. What rhetorical tricks did the politician use? Why? Once you’ve seen through what the politician wanted you to believe, you’ll hopefully have a clearer idea of what is actually at stake.
Suggested further reading:
Through the Language Glass by Guy Deutscher
Through the Language Glass (2010) explores the many ways in which language both reflects and influences our culture. By exploring the different ways that languages deal with space, gender and color, the book demonstrates just how fundamentally the language you speak alters your perception of the world.
September 7, 2021
This is going to be my only non-fiction review, most likely.
I'll keep it short: it was interesting.
Rhetoric is largely ignored these days, so seeing how it affects us every day was fascinating. While the concepts of rhetoric are subtle and intriguing, Romm tends to overdo it by giving us too many examples of too many things on too many times. This upsets the pacing of this 200 page infodump that some students might be forced to read.
Also, the prose felt too...proud. It's like reading about someone showing off their favorite dog. You must be told everything about it, in the most condescending way possible.
However, despite my complaints, I liked the brief moments of the book in which Romm wasted no time in explaining each concept and providing small examples of them. They were informational in a nice way. They didn't feel like long rambles of a professor who does not know how to teach.
Overall, it's worth a read. It might open your eyes a little.
I'll keep it short: it was interesting.
Rhetoric is largely ignored these days, so seeing how it affects us every day was fascinating. While the concepts of rhetoric are subtle and intriguing, Romm tends to overdo it by giving us too many examples of too many things on too many times. This upsets the pacing of this 200 page infodump that some students might be forced to read.
Also, the prose felt too...proud. It's like reading about someone showing off their favorite dog. You must be told everything about it, in the most condescending way possible.
However, despite my complaints, I liked the brief moments of the book in which Romm wasted no time in explaining each concept and providing small examples of them. They were informational in a nice way. They didn't feel like long rambles of a professor who does not know how to teach.
Overall, it's worth a read. It might open your eyes a little.
June 4, 2018
Great book. No book is perfect, and going into this book, my expectations weren't super high.
This book can be summed up in this quotation:
"Mastery of rhetoric is critical to explaining the enduring power of Shakespeare and the King James Bible. Rhetoric is the scaffolding of Lincoln’s and Churchill’s most brilliant oratorical constructions. President Obama has largely ignored rhetoric and narrative during his presidency—and suffered the consequences."
Different orators are discussed and the examples given are what makes for the content. Though it all felt like a variety of essays pieced together rather loosely. A bit of a different take then the books Words Like Loaded Pistols and Thank You for Arguing.
This book can be summed up in this quotation:
"Mastery of rhetoric is critical to explaining the enduring power of Shakespeare and the King James Bible. Rhetoric is the scaffolding of Lincoln’s and Churchill’s most brilliant oratorical constructions. President Obama has largely ignored rhetoric and narrative during his presidency—and suffered the consequences."
Different orators are discussed and the examples given are what makes for the content. Though it all felt like a variety of essays pieced together rather loosely. A bit of a different take then the books Words Like Loaded Pistols and Thank You for Arguing.
January 13, 2022
I think this is a great book if you want to improve your speechwriting and writing, in general. The author does cite some of his sources which lends credibility to some of his claims. I saw a criticism that the author focuses too much on headlines and tweets, but isn't that the whole point of the book? The author even acknowledges that facts don't win peoples' minds; it's an inconvenient truth. Some areas of the book I found to be a bit ambiguous and difficult to follow but overall I enjoyed the flow and the main ideas he tries to get across. I will definitely be using some of his ideas in my writing and speech moving forward.
February 3, 2018
The book does a great job of selecting some of the most common tricks found in rhetoric and breaks them down so the reader can easily follow along with his claims. His selection of people to analyze such as Lady gaga and Shakespeare provides a bit of intrigue and wonder on what he could say about those subjects under the same theme in the same book.
It is a quick read and thats how it should be. Unless you really want to become a master at rhetoric. If so, this book might disappoint you. It is not that he does a bad job explaining, he just touches the veneer on the subject.
It is a quick read and thats how it should be. Unless you really want to become a master at rhetoric. If so, this book might disappoint you. It is not that he does a bad job explaining, he just touches the veneer on the subject.
November 30, 2020
The book highlights that rhetoric isn’t a forgotten art that is confined to old dusty historical and literary books. In fact, it is still here today, even if it often goes unnoticed. Whenever you wish to influence and persuade people, you could put rhetoric to use. The book also advices to analyse the information you receive, like when a politician speaks. Don’t just buy the message, analyse the speech and the sort of rhetorical tricks it contents. Once you have seen through what the politician wanted you to believe, you will hopefully have a clearer picture of what is actually at stake.
November 30, 2020
Language Intelligence (2012) focuses on an aspect of language that is often overlooked or dismissed: the art of rhetoric. From the King James Bible to Shakespeare, from modern-day political campaigns to the lyrics of pop songs, rhetoric is a widely used tool – one that we all should learn to use and understand. After all, in words there is power and strength.
September 7, 2025
This book had some hype around it. So I bought it. Almost immediately the book felt dated. Written in the early days of Twitter and before the massive social media revolution that we live in today the book talks about ”250 retweets” and the likes.
The reason it gets 3 stars is the classical part of rhetoric from Plato to Shakespeare. The author should consider a rewrite into modern context.
The reason it gets 3 stars is the classical part of rhetoric from Plato to Shakespeare. The author should consider a rewrite into modern context.
December 11, 2017
I would have liked it better sans the enviro-science plugs.
July 14, 2019
Gonna need to read this again.
December 21, 2020
Worth checking out
August 9, 2022
Dated. Author is overconfident in his dubious claims
June 6, 2015
This book offers some interesting insights into the structure of rhetoric and tactics used by those who are skilled in using it. It is a light, easy read, and uses interesting examples throughout. Mainly, it reminded me of concepts I learned many years ago in high school literature and composition courses. It fails on several counts, however. First and foremost, I hate when a book does not deliver on its promises in the summary. While this book delivers on its promise to discuss some of the world's greatest communicators, I do not think it succeeds in providing the reader with 'language intelligence' to apply these lessons in their daily life. I know this is perhaps part bad marketing, but this book appears to be self-published...I cannot find publisher details anywhere. Judging by the book itself, the author's only qualification for writing this book is having a popular blog, and the cover is peppered with copied and pasted praise for his blog. Fair enough in this modern age, I guess, but it wasn't a good start. It certainly didn't change my view that being a good blogger does not mean you are a good book author.
The big issue for me, I think, is that this is a book that is written in the style of a humanities student, and I tend to read more in the realm of social and life sciences. I felt like I was reading an English student's independent study essay. This means the book contains only a couple of rare facts to support the author's argument, with the bulk of the book comprised of example text to prove the author's thesis. I realise there is nothing wrong with this in the humanities, but the author certainly failed to convince me of most of his arguments. While I will quite happily accept his breakdown of the key aspects of rhetoric (e.g. metaphor, extended metaphor, short words, irony, foreshadowing), I find the argument that it is the language of rhetoric *itself* that sells an idea a bit hard to swallow. Sure, it's a piece of the puzzle, but do you really think that the same words spoken by Martin Luther King, Jr in the I Have a Dream speech would have the same effect if uttered by George W. Bush? Can we chalk up the success of Churchill and Lincoln to their devoted study and use of rhetoric, or is there something else about them, the time and place in which they led, etc.? Romm is particularly disdainful of Obama, despite being left-leaning as far as I can tell, and argues that he isn't charismatic because he doesn't use metaphor (the connection between metaphor and charisma is one of the few areas where he uses research data). You can say many things about Obama, but saying that he is not charismatic simply defies common sense. Maybe he isn't skilled in rhetoric, but how, then, did he inspire so much with his initial messaging? He praises George W Bush, who did indeed use rhetoric to his advantage throughout his presidency, but to call him a master of Socratic irony? I call bullshit. Romm is also quite taken with Lady Gaga, arguing that her use of extended metaphor is what makes hits like Bad Romance and Poker Face so popular. Again, I ask where is the proof that it was the metaphor and not the marketing that generated this success? My record (okay, mp3) collection is full of songs that are extended metaphors, but not a single one of them got a billion hits on YouTube. This is not a meritocracy we live in; and while being skilled in the art of rhetoric is important and can be a huge factor in success, this book seems to give it far too much weight...without providing much evidence to support its bold claims.
The book is quite short, but draws repeatedly on the same examples, which I also found quite tedious. This is perhaps Romm applying his own rules of rhetoric (e.g. repetition, brevity), but what is remarkable is that I was so unconvinced by the rhetoric of someone writing a book on how to master the subject. I think I expected something quite different after hearing his interview on Point of Inquiry several years ago, so perhaps I am being too harsh. I do think this would be an interesting book to read in a high school english class, if only because it provides some very intriguing areas for discussion and debate. It's a good primer on the art of rhetoric, but it falls down in its conclusions and fails to adequately translate lessons from the book's examples to practical tips on persuasion.
The big issue for me, I think, is that this is a book that is written in the style of a humanities student, and I tend to read more in the realm of social and life sciences. I felt like I was reading an English student's independent study essay. This means the book contains only a couple of rare facts to support the author's argument, with the bulk of the book comprised of example text to prove the author's thesis. I realise there is nothing wrong with this in the humanities, but the author certainly failed to convince me of most of his arguments. While I will quite happily accept his breakdown of the key aspects of rhetoric (e.g. metaphor, extended metaphor, short words, irony, foreshadowing), I find the argument that it is the language of rhetoric *itself* that sells an idea a bit hard to swallow. Sure, it's a piece of the puzzle, but do you really think that the same words spoken by Martin Luther King, Jr in the I Have a Dream speech would have the same effect if uttered by George W. Bush? Can we chalk up the success of Churchill and Lincoln to their devoted study and use of rhetoric, or is there something else about them, the time and place in which they led, etc.? Romm is particularly disdainful of Obama, despite being left-leaning as far as I can tell, and argues that he isn't charismatic because he doesn't use metaphor (the connection between metaphor and charisma is one of the few areas where he uses research data). You can say many things about Obama, but saying that he is not charismatic simply defies common sense. Maybe he isn't skilled in rhetoric, but how, then, did he inspire so much with his initial messaging? He praises George W Bush, who did indeed use rhetoric to his advantage throughout his presidency, but to call him a master of Socratic irony? I call bullshit. Romm is also quite taken with Lady Gaga, arguing that her use of extended metaphor is what makes hits like Bad Romance and Poker Face so popular. Again, I ask where is the proof that it was the metaphor and not the marketing that generated this success? My record (okay, mp3) collection is full of songs that are extended metaphors, but not a single one of them got a billion hits on YouTube. This is not a meritocracy we live in; and while being skilled in the art of rhetoric is important and can be a huge factor in success, this book seems to give it far too much weight...without providing much evidence to support its bold claims.
The book is quite short, but draws repeatedly on the same examples, which I also found quite tedious. This is perhaps Romm applying his own rules of rhetoric (e.g. repetition, brevity), but what is remarkable is that I was so unconvinced by the rhetoric of someone writing a book on how to master the subject. I think I expected something quite different after hearing his interview on Point of Inquiry several years ago, so perhaps I am being too harsh. I do think this would be an interesting book to read in a high school english class, if only because it provides some very intriguing areas for discussion and debate. It's a good primer on the art of rhetoric, but it falls down in its conclusions and fails to adequately translate lessons from the book's examples to practical tips on persuasion.
June 23, 2013
You can almost get what this book has to offer just from it's table of contents. Romm makes the case that persuasion at a mass scale (eg, political campaigns, advertising, pop artists) succeed based on a few principles, each of which is a chapter in this book. The most fundamental are 'short words win' and 'repeat, repeat, repeat', 'repeat, repeat, repeat'. This may seem obvious to some, but this book is full of examples where these points were not followed. (Here's one: John Kerry, editing out parts of his speechwriters' work as 'too slogany' on his way to losing the presidential election.) Advertiser already know this, he is trying to get this info out to a broader audience, particularly activists in his field of global warming.
It's a very important point about the difference between mass communication vs communication among specialists in a particular field. Among specialists one makes a oint by supplying data and analysis within a framework of established terminology, etc, etc. But with mass communication many in your mass audience don't have the time or the inclination to give you a careful listen and look up the facts. So ya gotta bombard them with simple phrases that get a smidgen of their attention and, hopefully, steer their interest your way. It may seem not pretty, we'd all like a world where everyone gave careful consideration to every issue at hand (or at least MY issue!), but that's not the world we live in.
He also demonstrates how master speech writers (as well as Bob Dylan, Lady Gaga, Shakespeare, and the authors of the King James Bible) use metaphors and extended metaphors to convey more sophisticated messages. Once the mass audience understands that you are basically saying 'We're up Shit Creek without a paddle', then you can start to talk about the paddle you have to offer and the the source of the shit and so on without having to construct a detailed scientific analysis of, say, the irreversibility of climate change.
So using metaphors and other figures of speech we avoid being condemned to dumbed-down language with mind-numbing repetition of simple phrases (although that will always be part of the game) - an articulate campaign can draw people into their metaphor and get them to take a closer look at the issues. One must use the simple language to get people's attention and, once one has their ever-so-brief attention, one may slip in a metaphor, then if they are still paying attention, one may extend that metaphor and so on until hopefully some of your audience are actually examining the true situation beyond the metaphor... and perhaps the rest are vaguely sympathetic enough to vote/buy your way.
I think this book is persuasive if you already agree with it's points on some level, but it's not like the level of argument is incontrovertable. It's more like he points to speeches of Lincoln and Churchill and asserts that certain devices made them effective, devices that we can all employ equally well. But there's not much in the way of hard evidence (quantitative analysis and such) his ideas make for effective communication. If you agree with his point (and I generally do) then this will remind you of what you already know but perhaps ignored or forgot. But if someone doesn't want to accept Romm's main points, then there is nothing in this book that is convincing enough for force one to change one's mind.
The title of the book "Language Intelligence" strikes me as awkward and doesn't follow his own advice of 'short words win'. Maybe it's supposed to be a metaphor for "Emotional Intelligence". I guess he's not trying to reach such a broad audience with that title. He reached me, anyway. :)
Note that the book is based entirely on the English language, and mostly US culture. It would be interesting to look at how well these ideas apply to other languages and cultures.
It's a very important point about the difference between mass communication vs communication among specialists in a particular field. Among specialists one makes a oint by supplying data and analysis within a framework of established terminology, etc, etc. But with mass communication many in your mass audience don't have the time or the inclination to give you a careful listen and look up the facts. So ya gotta bombard them with simple phrases that get a smidgen of their attention and, hopefully, steer their interest your way. It may seem not pretty, we'd all like a world where everyone gave careful consideration to every issue at hand (or at least MY issue!), but that's not the world we live in.
He also demonstrates how master speech writers (as well as Bob Dylan, Lady Gaga, Shakespeare, and the authors of the King James Bible) use metaphors and extended metaphors to convey more sophisticated messages. Once the mass audience understands that you are basically saying 'We're up Shit Creek without a paddle', then you can start to talk about the paddle you have to offer and the the source of the shit and so on without having to construct a detailed scientific analysis of, say, the irreversibility of climate change.
So using metaphors and other figures of speech we avoid being condemned to dumbed-down language with mind-numbing repetition of simple phrases (although that will always be part of the game) - an articulate campaign can draw people into their metaphor and get them to take a closer look at the issues. One must use the simple language to get people's attention and, once one has their ever-so-brief attention, one may slip in a metaphor, then if they are still paying attention, one may extend that metaphor and so on until hopefully some of your audience are actually examining the true situation beyond the metaphor... and perhaps the rest are vaguely sympathetic enough to vote/buy your way.
I think this book is persuasive if you already agree with it's points on some level, but it's not like the level of argument is incontrovertable. It's more like he points to speeches of Lincoln and Churchill and asserts that certain devices made them effective, devices that we can all employ equally well. But there's not much in the way of hard evidence (quantitative analysis and such) his ideas make for effective communication. If you agree with his point (and I generally do) then this will remind you of what you already know but perhaps ignored or forgot. But if someone doesn't want to accept Romm's main points, then there is nothing in this book that is convincing enough for force one to change one's mind.
The title of the book "Language Intelligence" strikes me as awkward and doesn't follow his own advice of 'short words win'. Maybe it's supposed to be a metaphor for "Emotional Intelligence". I guess he's not trying to reach such a broad audience with that title. He reached me, anyway. :)
Note that the book is based entirely on the English language, and mostly US culture. It would be interesting to look at how well these ideas apply to other languages and cultures.
January 26, 2013
Romm's Language Intelligence presents the essentials of rhetoric necessary to survive in a culture that values frames over facts. In a society where creating a compelling narrative trumps reality, where "politics is sport is war," these rhetorical tools of using simple language, repetition, or extended metaphor (among others)are weapons of both defense and attack.
The illustrations he chooses make his argument compelling. Classical verse, Biblical passages, the plays of Shakespeare, speeches of Churchill and Lincoln--as foreshadowed in the title--reinforce the need for these strategies. I've been considering how effective this book would be as a reading in a high school composition class...and I have reservations. I've studied Shakespeare, read the Bible (less studiously than I did the Bard), and thrived on political debate for decades. Romm's illustrations resonate with me, but I'm not sure how accessible they would be to younger persons with different experiences. He does make passing reference to the most recent political campaigns, and the illustration of Lady Gaga's success emanating from her use of repetition and extended metaphor seem a bit forced.
There is not too much new here. Luntz and Lakoff have plowed much of this ground. Romm does collect it all into one basic handbook, and that should be sufficient, especially for his stated goal to help scientists recover control of the climate debate. He does make clear that to be proficient, one must study and practice these strategies, and he does provide the direction and motivation for that undertaking.
The illustrations he chooses make his argument compelling. Classical verse, Biblical passages, the plays of Shakespeare, speeches of Churchill and Lincoln--as foreshadowed in the title--reinforce the need for these strategies. I've been considering how effective this book would be as a reading in a high school composition class...and I have reservations. I've studied Shakespeare, read the Bible (less studiously than I did the Bard), and thrived on political debate for decades. Romm's illustrations resonate with me, but I'm not sure how accessible they would be to younger persons with different experiences. He does make passing reference to the most recent political campaigns, and the illustration of Lady Gaga's success emanating from her use of repetition and extended metaphor seem a bit forced.
There is not too much new here. Luntz and Lakoff have plowed much of this ground. Romm does collect it all into one basic handbook, and that should be sufficient, especially for his stated goal to help scientists recover control of the climate debate. He does make clear that to be proficient, one must study and practice these strategies, and he does provide the direction and motivation for that undertaking.
August 1, 2017
One line review: It's short, it's sweet, but not what I expected.
After hearing much fanfare over this book from my science communication colleagues I decided to give this book a look. Rhetorical devices are nothing new and Romm makes a very clear distinction from his title. What he mainly argues is that the art and appreciation of rhetoric has been lost on the general public. Rhetoric is all around us, from famous speeches, to advertisements, to music and pop culture. The best of these use rhetoric effectively and have a firm understanding the art of engage and communicating to their audiences.
I'm scientist struggling with how to communicate science to a larger audience. Romm is a influential science writer and is well known from his climate blog thinkprogress.org. I was hoping that Romm would have more discussion and examples of how scientists could use rhetoric without diluting their message or credibility but only found a few brief paragraphs and a discussion in the afterword.
Overall I would recommend this book to anyone that has an interest in communicating more effectively or wants to understand how people might use rhetoric to deceive them. The book is short, readable and Romm keeps the message relevant by drawing examples from the most familiar rhetoric in western culture.
After hearing much fanfare over this book from my science communication colleagues I decided to give this book a look. Rhetorical devices are nothing new and Romm makes a very clear distinction from his title. What he mainly argues is that the art and appreciation of rhetoric has been lost on the general public. Rhetoric is all around us, from famous speeches, to advertisements, to music and pop culture. The best of these use rhetoric effectively and have a firm understanding the art of engage and communicating to their audiences.
I'm scientist struggling with how to communicate science to a larger audience. Romm is a influential science writer and is well known from his climate blog thinkprogress.org. I was hoping that Romm would have more discussion and examples of how scientists could use rhetoric without diluting their message or credibility but only found a few brief paragraphs and a discussion in the afterword.
Overall I would recommend this book to anyone that has an interest in communicating more effectively or wants to understand how people might use rhetoric to deceive them. The book is short, readable and Romm keeps the message relevant by drawing examples from the most familiar rhetoric in western culture.
September 13, 2012
This book received good reviews on some blogs, the author himself being a prominent blogger on climate issues. It was interesting but disappointing in being heavily focussed on the very limited context of US presidents, US politics, and US presidential debates. Although called 'Language Intelligence', the book is really about only the English language, and that too heavily using US examples (Lincoln, Reagan, Bush, Obama), with a sprinkling of Churchill and Shakespeare. There are virtually no examples from other languages and even more unfortunate, very few real examples from the authors own experience in dealing with climate change debates and rhetoric. It has some very pertinent ideas and persuasive arguments (there better be, since this is a book on how to use language for persuasion) but leaves the impression that it falls short of being comprehensive and compelling enough.
January 24, 2016
This was an OK book. It is basically about using rhetorical devices to communicate better and includes historical examples (i.e.Shakespeare, Churchill, The Bible) as well as recent examples (i.e. Bill Clinton, Bush, Bob Dylan). The subject matter was interesting but many of the examples were repeated and I got sick of the constant Lady Ga Ga and Bob Dylan references. I'm not familiar or interested in Lady Ga Ga and I really dislike the music of Bob Dylan. I suppose the author had to go with artists whose work he is most familiar with, but I'm guessing that you could find examples of use of metaphors, etc. in any number of musicians' work. It was a quick read and worth reading if you write or speak for a living.
December 28, 2015
If you are a writer or a presenter or someone just interested in understanding how language works, this book is a must read. In this book the author shares the rhetorical strategies of politicians and entertainers and show how these strategies are used to get fans, persuade people to causes, and otherwise influence how we think about the issues in our world. Reading this book was eye-opening for me and has helped change how I write as a result. If you want to become a better writer then read this book and keep it as a resource to draw on in your work.
March 1, 2014
I wish I could have read a book like this back in middle school English class. It's an empowering book that keeps you engaged with fun and enlightening narratives throughout. Romm connects the power of rhetoric to its greatest practitioners including influential social-political, religious and poet-artists -- from the past and present -- and in the process teaches you, the reader, the fundamentals that you can build upon to become your own influencer through words and persuasion.
June 23, 2013
Brilliant. A perfect companion to George Lakoff's work and essential reading to anyone who cares about language and persuasive writing and speaking. Given his expertise in climate science, Romm might have done more to pinpoint the problems progressives have had in piercing the veil of ignorance and denial in Washington and corporate boardrooms.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews