What do you think?
Rate this book
Across the Pond: An Englishman's View of America
Americans have long been fascinated with the oddness of the British, but the English, according to Terry Eagleton, find their transatlantic neighbors equally strange. Why must we broadcast our children’s school grades with bumper stickers announcing “My Child Made the Honor Roll?” Why don’t we appreciate the indispensability of the teapot? And why do we so foolishly insist on being friendly to every passing stranger?
In his quirky journey through the language, geography, and national character of the USA, literary theorist Eagleton probes the depths of American culture with an academic’s gravitas and a comedian’s glee. He answers the questions his compatriots have always had but (being British) are too reticent to ask, like why we willingly rise at the crack of dawn, even on Sundays. In this pithy, warmhearted, and often very funny book, Eagleton melds a good old-fashioned roast with true admiration for his neighbors across the pond.
In his quirky journey through the language, geography, and national character of the USA, literary theorist Eagleton probes the depths of American culture with an academic’s gravitas and a comedian’s glee. He answers the questions his compatriots have always had but (being British) are too reticent to ask, like why we willingly rise at the crack of dawn, even on Sundays. In this pithy, warmhearted, and often very funny book, Eagleton melds a good old-fashioned roast with true admiration for his neighbors across the pond.
178 pages, Hardcover
First published May 7, 2013
21 people are currently reading
491 people want to read
About the author
Terry Eagleton
164 books1,288 followersWidely regarded as England's most influential living literary critic & theorist, Dr. Terry Eagleton currently serves as Distinguished Professor of English Literature at the University of Lancaster and as Visiting Professor at the National University of Ireland, Galway. He was Thomas Warton Prof. of English Literature at the University of Oxford ('92-01) & John Edward Taylor Professor of English Literature at the University of Manchester 'til '08. He returned to the University of Notre Dame in the Autumn '09 semester as Distinguished Visitor in the English Department.
He's written over 40 books, including Literary Theory: An Introduction ('83); The Ideology of the Aesthetic ('90) & The Illusions of Postmodernism ('96).
He delivered Yale's '08 Terry Lectures and gave a Gifford Lecture in 3/10, titled The God Debate.
He's written over 40 books, including Literary Theory: An Introduction ('83); The Ideology of the Aesthetic ('90) & The Illusions of Postmodernism ('96).
He delivered Yale's '08 Terry Lectures and gave a Gifford Lecture in 3/10, titled The God Debate.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 82 reviews
February 19, 2021
A Dangerous People
An outrageous book. Eagleton at his wittiest and most sardonic.
Only in comparison can we perceive our own insanities. British insanities do tend to be less malign and even less fundamental than the American sort, largely because the British laugh at themselves more readily. Put another way: Americans on the whole are more profound than their superficial silliness suggest. And that may not be a good thing.
Eagleton appreciates what Harold Bloom noted as the underlying Gnosticism of American metaphysical/materialist culture, its true religion (see: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...). For Americans, Eagleton writes,
Thus the American fantasy of omnipotence as well as immortality which Donald Trump has so successfully exploited. What his Evangelical supporters haven't twigged onto yet is that this fantasy isn't Christian but Gnostic just as Bloom argues and Eagleton describes. The myth of the self-made man is a also a Christian heresy (Pelagianism), recognised since the 4th century.
And, irony of ironies, the origin of Gnosticism is ultimately pagan and Persian, that is to say, Iranian. Its essential doctrine is the idea of human deification, the gradual transformation of mankind into a divine species. This doctrine is most clearly expressed in Mormonism but, as Bloom points out, it has been transmitted to every Christian sect in America. It even affects America’s atheism with a triumphant optimism of a liberal Utopia.
When everyone believes they are heading for deification, the currency of the divine seems doomed to drastic depreciation, dragging the rest of us into a maelstrom of metaphysical and material hyper-inflation. Trump is a visible manifestation of the phenomenon, a leader whose only talent is of unlimited confidence in his own divinity, the ultimate debasement of the spiritual dollar. As Eagleton notes: "People who are both powerful and dissatisfied are peculiarly dangerous." Their particular faith, held firmly but largely without awareness, is the source of American power and danger to the world.
An outrageous book. Eagleton at his wittiest and most sardonic.
Only in comparison can we perceive our own insanities. British insanities do tend to be less malign and even less fundamental than the American sort, largely because the British laugh at themselves more readily. Put another way: Americans on the whole are more profound than their superficial silliness suggest. And that may not be a good thing.
Eagleton appreciates what Harold Bloom noted as the underlying Gnosticism of American metaphysical/materialist culture, its true religion (see: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...). For Americans, Eagleton writes,
"The will lies at the core of the self, which means that the self is what bestows meaning and value on things. But the self is also orthodox of material reality. So we too are part of what must be hammered into shape. We are clay in our own hands, awaiting the moment when we will transform ourselves into an artefact of great splendour. The self is always a work in progress. It is a kind of wilderness which must be cultivated, mixed with one's labour, before it can become meaningful. It is part of Puritan doctrine that human labour is what makes things real. Before we happened along, there was just chaos. Ceaseless activity is what keeps the world in existence. American optimism thus conceals a darker vision. It springs as much from a scepticism about material reality as from an affirmation of it. In themselves, Nature and the flesh are chaotic stuff. They are worthless until the spirit invests them with significance. It is labour that transforms Nature into meaning. And this always involves a degree of violence. Body and soul are both subject to belligerent onslaughts, along with the rain forests and terrorist strongholds."
Thus the American fantasy of omnipotence as well as immortality which Donald Trump has so successfully exploited. What his Evangelical supporters haven't twigged onto yet is that this fantasy isn't Christian but Gnostic just as Bloom argues and Eagleton describes. The myth of the self-made man is a also a Christian heresy (Pelagianism), recognised since the 4th century.
And, irony of ironies, the origin of Gnosticism is ultimately pagan and Persian, that is to say, Iranian. Its essential doctrine is the idea of human deification, the gradual transformation of mankind into a divine species. This doctrine is most clearly expressed in Mormonism but, as Bloom points out, it has been transmitted to every Christian sect in America. It even affects America’s atheism with a triumphant optimism of a liberal Utopia.
When everyone believes they are heading for deification, the currency of the divine seems doomed to drastic depreciation, dragging the rest of us into a maelstrom of metaphysical and material hyper-inflation. Trump is a visible manifestation of the phenomenon, a leader whose only talent is of unlimited confidence in his own divinity, the ultimate debasement of the spiritual dollar. As Eagleton notes: "People who are both powerful and dissatisfied are peculiarly dangerous." Their particular faith, held firmly but largely without awareness, is the source of American power and danger to the world.
November 5, 2014
The Irish are funny and friendly.
The British are funny but not friendly.
The Americans are friendly but not funny.
The French are neither funny nor friendly.
Noting the above as stereotypes, Terry Eagleton establishes his premise in the beginning of the book and then zooms off to discuss the differences on both sides of "the pond". In less than 200 pages, he makes his points with love and familiarity.
He has some dillies:
1. Aliens are obviously biased toward Americans
For some unfathomable reason, Americans get to be whisked off to other galaxies far more often than, say, Swedes or Slovenes.
2. National symbols
It is suitable that the national symbol of the United States is the eagle. In Wales, it is the leek.
3. America's obsession with itself
To see yourself from the outside, it is inadvisable to have an enormous ocean stretching on either side of you.
4. New World boldness
The European instinct is either/or, while the American impulse is for both/and.
5. America's lack of charm
Charm is more of a European quality than an American one. It is hard to be charming on a large scale, not least in a country where individual states dwarf entire European countries.
I truly enjoyed this book and Eagleton's asides. He has wonderful little cupcake sentences, full of sprinkles and icing. My only complaint is that I wish the book was a bit longer, so the laughter could continue.
The (American) nation itself is the work of the will. It is not just a country like any other, but a project, a vocation, a mission, a destiny, a spiritual enterprise. Nobody thinks this about Belgium. It is not the case with...the United Arab Emirates, which some Americans might suspect is a movie company.
Britain is not the work of the will. The British never planned their empire, for example. It just fell into their lap in a fit of absent-mindedness. They awoke one morning to find that they were governing India, even though nothing had been further from their thoughts.
Book Season = Summer (America = the Hoover vacuum cleaner of nations)
The British are funny but not friendly.
The Americans are friendly but not funny.
The French are neither funny nor friendly.
Noting the above as stereotypes, Terry Eagleton establishes his premise in the beginning of the book and then zooms off to discuss the differences on both sides of "the pond". In less than 200 pages, he makes his points with love and familiarity.
He has some dillies:
1. Aliens are obviously biased toward Americans
For some unfathomable reason, Americans get to be whisked off to other galaxies far more often than, say, Swedes or Slovenes.
2. National symbols
It is suitable that the national symbol of the United States is the eagle. In Wales, it is the leek.
3. America's obsession with itself
To see yourself from the outside, it is inadvisable to have an enormous ocean stretching on either side of you.
4. New World boldness
The European instinct is either/or, while the American impulse is for both/and.
5. America's lack of charm
Charm is more of a European quality than an American one. It is hard to be charming on a large scale, not least in a country where individual states dwarf entire European countries.
I truly enjoyed this book and Eagleton's asides. He has wonderful little cupcake sentences, full of sprinkles and icing. My only complaint is that I wish the book was a bit longer, so the laughter could continue.
The (American) nation itself is the work of the will. It is not just a country like any other, but a project, a vocation, a mission, a destiny, a spiritual enterprise. Nobody thinks this about Belgium. It is not the case with...the United Arab Emirates, which some Americans might suspect is a movie company.
Britain is not the work of the will. The British never planned their empire, for example. It just fell into their lap in a fit of absent-mindedness. They awoke one morning to find that they were governing India, even though nothing had been further from their thoughts.
Book Season = Summer (America = the Hoover vacuum cleaner of nations)
June 28, 2013
I didn't enjoy this book nearly as much as I thought I would. Unfortunately, Mr. Eagleton lacks the wit of a Bill Bryson. His attempts at humor are only mildly amusing, at best. There are some piercingly true assessments of the American culture; they are just not funny. Here is an example from pages 96-97:
"Because of the all-powerful will, Americans are great believers in the fraudulent doctrine that you can do anything you want if you try hard enough. In no other country on earth does one hear this consoling lie chanted so often.....The United States has a larger proportion of its population in prison, higher levels of mental illness, greater rates of teenage pregnancy, a lower level of child well-being, and higher levels of poverty and social exclusion than most other developed nations. Perhaps this is because its people have not been exercising their wills in concert."
The author currently lives in Ireland, so he throws in many comparisons of Americans with the Irish, as well as with the English. This is a sort of tripartite exercise in informal cultural analysis from one man's point of view. The writer is an academic (known for literary criticism), so this is not a beach read. It is not difficult to read, just not all that entertaining.
"Because of the all-powerful will, Americans are great believers in the fraudulent doctrine that you can do anything you want if you try hard enough. In no other country on earth does one hear this consoling lie chanted so often.....The United States has a larger proportion of its population in prison, higher levels of mental illness, greater rates of teenage pregnancy, a lower level of child well-being, and higher levels of poverty and social exclusion than most other developed nations. Perhaps this is because its people have not been exercising their wills in concert."
The author currently lives in Ireland, so he throws in many comparisons of Americans with the Irish, as well as with the English. This is a sort of tripartite exercise in informal cultural analysis from one man's point of view. The writer is an academic (known for literary criticism), so this is not a beach read. It is not difficult to read, just not all that entertaining.
March 31, 2014
I hate to give a book a lower grade because it wasn't what I was expecting but that is the case here. I thought this would be an amusing Bill Bryson-esque type description of what the Brits think of the Americans. Although there were traces of this and they were amusing, the author spent more time on the 1835 study Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville and what he thought all those many years ago. I would have read de Tocqueville if I wanted that information.
The book turned into a short (178 pages) dissertation on the Puritan roots of Americans which he posits have shaped the difference between the British and the Americans in everything from speech to greed. It also became repetitive because he focused on that theme throughout. No pun intended, it was not my cup of tea.
The book turned into a short (178 pages) dissertation on the Puritan roots of Americans which he posits have shaped the difference between the British and the Americans in everything from speech to greed. It also became repetitive because he focused on that theme throughout. No pun intended, it was not my cup of tea.
March 13, 2018
I wanted to like this book. I really did. Comparing American and British cultures is a favorite activity of mine. But Eagleton took it too far.
He injects his own leftist liberal bias into the writing. He sets up straw men (consisting of any American conservative, or frankly any traditional American Christian) and promptly knocks them down. I know that stereotyping is going to be prevalent in a book like this, but Eagleton is clearly wrong in certain places, and it made me angry.
Now, there are sections of this book which are accurate, even enjoyable. He describes the British "stiff upper lip" and American optimism in humorous and acceptable ways. But the good parts are far too small and far too spread out to make up for the bad sections.
I did appreciate this quote: "If an American and a Briton were together in a prisoner-of-war camp, the Briton would fade gradually away with a plucky little grin and the American would escape."
From now on, I'm going to stick to Eagleton's theory books — to limit his ability to inject his personal life into my reading.
He injects his own leftist liberal bias into the writing. He sets up straw men (consisting of any American conservative, or frankly any traditional American Christian) and promptly knocks them down. I know that stereotyping is going to be prevalent in a book like this, but Eagleton is clearly wrong in certain places, and it made me angry.
Now, there are sections of this book which are accurate, even enjoyable. He describes the British "stiff upper lip" and American optimism in humorous and acceptable ways. But the good parts are far too small and far too spread out to make up for the bad sections.
I did appreciate this quote: "If an American and a Briton were together in a prisoner-of-war camp, the Briton would fade gradually away with a plucky little grin and the American would escape."
From now on, I'm going to stick to Eagleton's theory books — to limit his ability to inject his personal life into my reading.
August 31, 2013
Terry Eagleton is hopelessly lost on most Americans, a fact of which he is most acutely aware. Thus his most recent book, Across the Pond: An Englishman’s View of America, is a curiously telling addition to his body of work: A venerable British scholar’s humorous critique of U.S. culture, which seems harmless enough until one realizes—thanks in large part to Eagleton’s penetrating observations—that nerves incur damage remarkably close to the surface of Americans' thin skins.
In the opening chapter, Eagleton writes "No decent piece of writing simply tells it like it is, without a sensual delight in telling it" and proceeds to demonstrate his unwavering commitment to this maxim. In other words, he means what he says and in this sense at least tailors the book to appeal to his audience, ever mindful of our puritanical devotion to the virtues of plainspoken directness, "One of the gravest moral defects of Americans," he writes. This turns out to be perfect motivation for reveling stylishly in the fun of upending the narcissistic roots of our supposed 'naturalness.' Eagleton is rather obviously delighted to inform us that "Nothing is more artificial than a cult of shambling spontaneity. People who are self-consciously blunt, plain and forthright are in the grip of an image of themselves quite as much as people who think they are Elvis Presley or Mother Theresa."
Even so he is quite complimentary of Americans on the whole, though these praises seem to have been lost on many of the book's American reviewers. Perhaps they failed to note his qualifications about sweeping generalizations in his introductory note to the text. More likely, however, they overlooked his many positive remarks about citizens of "the States" because he oscillates breathlessly between observations that are witheringly scornful and somewhat charitable. (If I may be so bold, converting this range from the metric system for my fellow Americans, this runs the gamut from 'unspeakably horrible' to 'awesome'.) But jarring juxtapositions are in great measure where Eagleton's style derives its tremendous comedic force. And in any case, as the author himself points out, "The spirit of comedy is the spirit of forgiveness," which, for the author in question, implies a great deal more than may appear at first glance.
In Reason, Faith, and Revolution: Reflections on the God Debate, Eagleton articulates an immensely useful distinction between forgiveness and tolerance—the former being rooted in a deep, loving (metaphysical) commitment, the latter proceeding from a legal (material) obligation. It is exceedingly obvious to Eagleton (as it is to me) which vision sustains greater hope for a better life. For this reason it is difficult for me not to take his friendly fire in the spirit intended. Nor, Eagleton suggests, should we allow our puritanical sensibilities to chafe too excessively at irony. Readers are routinely reminded that whatever may lie at the root of the gloomiest satire, it is not essentially malicious. "Satire may be negative in content, but it is supremely positive in form. There is no criticism, however scabrous, that does not implicitly subscribe to an alternate vision of things."
Above all, I suspect, Eagleton wants to impart nothing more to his American audience than a deeper appreciation for the virtues of form—specifically a more stylized discourse replete with healthy doses of irony and self-mockery. He wishes to disabuse us of the tragic hero that lurks deep within each of our psyches and is the product of our inability to accept loss. "Tragedy is the wager that you can make something out of this dissolution, plucking value from loss and breakdown [...] In this as in other ways, [the US] is a profoundly anti-tragic civilisation. On the whole, it rejects the belief, common to both St. Paul and Martin Heidegger, that you can make something of your life only by making something of your death." In other words, we would do well to take leave of our inclinations toward striving and asserting, learning instead to “savour the delights of passivity.” There is, after all, a great deal to be said for availing oneself of the “spiritual treasures to be reaped from being acted on rather than acting.”
Perhaps it is fair to say that, in the end, Eagleton does in fact love the great American spirit. It's just that he happens to love more the pleasure of flaying The Great American Ethos. And if Americans complete the book having gained nothing more than a nagging self-awareness, it will no doubt have accomplished a great deal more than it set out to do, which is nothing much at all really.
In the opening chapter, Eagleton writes "No decent piece of writing simply tells it like it is, without a sensual delight in telling it" and proceeds to demonstrate his unwavering commitment to this maxim. In other words, he means what he says and in this sense at least tailors the book to appeal to his audience, ever mindful of our puritanical devotion to the virtues of plainspoken directness, "One of the gravest moral defects of Americans," he writes. This turns out to be perfect motivation for reveling stylishly in the fun of upending the narcissistic roots of our supposed 'naturalness.' Eagleton is rather obviously delighted to inform us that "Nothing is more artificial than a cult of shambling spontaneity. People who are self-consciously blunt, plain and forthright are in the grip of an image of themselves quite as much as people who think they are Elvis Presley or Mother Theresa."
Even so he is quite complimentary of Americans on the whole, though these praises seem to have been lost on many of the book's American reviewers. Perhaps they failed to note his qualifications about sweeping generalizations in his introductory note to the text. More likely, however, they overlooked his many positive remarks about citizens of "the States" because he oscillates breathlessly between observations that are witheringly scornful and somewhat charitable. (If I may be so bold, converting this range from the metric system for my fellow Americans, this runs the gamut from 'unspeakably horrible' to 'awesome'.) But jarring juxtapositions are in great measure where Eagleton's style derives its tremendous comedic force. And in any case, as the author himself points out, "The spirit of comedy is the spirit of forgiveness," which, for the author in question, implies a great deal more than may appear at first glance.
In Reason, Faith, and Revolution: Reflections on the God Debate, Eagleton articulates an immensely useful distinction between forgiveness and tolerance—the former being rooted in a deep, loving (metaphysical) commitment, the latter proceeding from a legal (material) obligation. It is exceedingly obvious to Eagleton (as it is to me) which vision sustains greater hope for a better life. For this reason it is difficult for me not to take his friendly fire in the spirit intended. Nor, Eagleton suggests, should we allow our puritanical sensibilities to chafe too excessively at irony. Readers are routinely reminded that whatever may lie at the root of the gloomiest satire, it is not essentially malicious. "Satire may be negative in content, but it is supremely positive in form. There is no criticism, however scabrous, that does not implicitly subscribe to an alternate vision of things."
Above all, I suspect, Eagleton wants to impart nothing more to his American audience than a deeper appreciation for the virtues of form—specifically a more stylized discourse replete with healthy doses of irony and self-mockery. He wishes to disabuse us of the tragic hero that lurks deep within each of our psyches and is the product of our inability to accept loss. "Tragedy is the wager that you can make something out of this dissolution, plucking value from loss and breakdown [...] In this as in other ways, [the US] is a profoundly anti-tragic civilisation. On the whole, it rejects the belief, common to both St. Paul and Martin Heidegger, that you can make something of your life only by making something of your death." In other words, we would do well to take leave of our inclinations toward striving and asserting, learning instead to “savour the delights of passivity.” There is, after all, a great deal to be said for availing oneself of the “spiritual treasures to be reaped from being acted on rather than acting.”
Perhaps it is fair to say that, in the end, Eagleton does in fact love the great American spirit. It's just that he happens to love more the pleasure of flaying The Great American Ethos. And if Americans complete the book having gained nothing more than a nagging self-awareness, it will no doubt have accomplished a great deal more than it set out to do, which is nothing much at all really.
September 28, 2014
If you've lived in Europe, you know that Americans are considered a safe target for ridicule. Just go to a stand-up comedy show in London. No one makes fun of, say, Pakistanis or Nigerians. It's not considered cool to poke fun at the ethnic and religious minorities. But Americans are a fair game. And the stereotypes of Americans are unvarying: fat, loud, and ignorant. Let's not argue over what portion of the British population possesses the three aforementioned qualities compared to Americans.
Eagleton wants to give the reader the impression that he's above such mean and baseless stereotyping, but somehow I doubt it. He keeps quoting Charles Dickens and Alexis de Tocqueville. His humor is ironic and very British, if I'm allowed to stereotype. And the book annoys you even when Eagleton is praising Americans; the positive qualities are also stereotypical. Americans are friendly and outgoing. Right. No grumpy loners in this country.
Eagleton wants to give the reader the impression that he's above such mean and baseless stereotyping, but somehow I doubt it. He keeps quoting Charles Dickens and Alexis de Tocqueville. His humor is ironic and very British, if I'm allowed to stereotype. And the book annoys you even when Eagleton is praising Americans; the positive qualities are also stereotypical. Americans are friendly and outgoing. Right. No grumpy loners in this country.
May 6, 2015
Back at Bryson!
September 7, 2013
I see why American readers would take issue -- but Eagleton takes the piss out of both Americans and Britons. In a funny, wry voice, Eagleton manages to offer fantastic insight into the need to take a good look at ourselves and invites us to poke fun at ourselves a little. I took my time reading this very short (and otherwise rather quick) read -- namely reading almost exclusively on my commute. But don't race through this book.
Aside from the straightforward jokes, and the very subtle ones, it's not so much what Eagleton is saying, as much as it is HOW he's saying it. His precise use of language is downright sexy. You can tell he's enjoying crafting these sentences together, and what makes it all the more pleasurable for the reader -- at least for me -- is how authentic it feels.
He's not dumbing it down -- if you don't know something, look it up. But he's NOT putting on a "LOOK HOW MANY HARD WORDS I KNOW, GUYS" show, either. That is, say what you will of the man, but his writing is not pretentious. He's not trying hard to impress anyone, and you can tell, which makes the reader want to savor his use of vocabulary, regardless of whether you take issue with what he's saying.
He loves language, obviously, and conveys it without explicitly stating it, and certainly not by beating the reader over the head with the idea.
Aside from the straightforward jokes, and the very subtle ones, it's not so much what Eagleton is saying, as much as it is HOW he's saying it. His precise use of language is downright sexy. You can tell he's enjoying crafting these sentences together, and what makes it all the more pleasurable for the reader -- at least for me -- is how authentic it feels.
He's not dumbing it down -- if you don't know something, look it up. But he's NOT putting on a "LOOK HOW MANY HARD WORDS I KNOW, GUYS" show, either. That is, say what you will of the man, but his writing is not pretentious. He's not trying hard to impress anyone, and you can tell, which makes the reader want to savor his use of vocabulary, regardless of whether you take issue with what he's saying.
He loves language, obviously, and conveys it without explicitly stating it, and certainly not by beating the reader over the head with the idea.
October 25, 2013
Amusing, perceptive. One of my favorite passages:
"Perhaps Americans can afford to be obese because they have so much space to expand into. People in the States will say "Excuse me" if they come within ten feet of you, since they are accustomed to having so much of the stuff at their disposal that they expect you to feel intruded on. On the Tokyo subway, by contrast, you can sit in someone's lap for half an hour without their realising. (On the London Underground they would notice but pretend that you weren't there, fearful of making a fuss.)It is an attempt to avoid such trespass that causes me to write so many books. Reading books by other people has always struck me as an unwarranted invasion of their personal space. This is why when I wish to read a book, I write one. It is a way of respecting the privacy of others."
"Perhaps Americans can afford to be obese because they have so much space to expand into. People in the States will say "Excuse me" if they come within ten feet of you, since they are accustomed to having so much of the stuff at their disposal that they expect you to feel intruded on. On the Tokyo subway, by contrast, you can sit in someone's lap for half an hour without their realising. (On the London Underground they would notice but pretend that you weren't there, fearful of making a fuss.)It is an attempt to avoid such trespass that causes me to write so many books. Reading books by other people has always struck me as an unwarranted invasion of their personal space. This is why when I wish to read a book, I write one. It is a way of respecting the privacy of others."
June 19, 2013
In a nutshell, Mr. Eagleton thinks Americans suck
January 2, 2017
I borrowed this from the library, but I think I will have to buy it so I can read it once a month and chuckle to myself all day.
December 14, 2017
Leído para una asignatura de la carrera. No puedo decir que lo haya disfrutado.
August 12, 2017
Having been born in the US but having grown up in the former British Trust Territory of Tanzania, I tend to look at Americans as an outsider might, and also find that despite not having lived in England, my experiences from Tanzania often had a bit of a British tinge to them. The book was billed as a funny look at the differences between the two cultures. I generally enjoy British humor much more than American humor. Still, though he wrote with British humor, I did not find it that funny but still found it had some interesting insights. The title seems like it should be just about two cultures but he also compares the Irish culture to that of the English. He points out the weaknesses of each culture but is also not afraid to bring out the real strengths of each culture. Eagleton is English but has spent time in both the US and Ireland. His insights are written at a general level, and may come from his philosophical background, but I still found it to be a fairly interesting book. It often fit with my own ambivalent feelings about American culture.
January 1, 2018
After living in Europe and in the US, and having read multiple essays, books, personal accounts and critiques of the cultural differences between Europe and the US, I must confess (am I becoming too American by confessing?) that this was the book that I have been searching for. Once I started to read the book, I could not put it down. Terry Eagleton presents us with a well thought critique of the differences between England and the US whilst inviting the reader to find some humorous sparse bits of sarcasm hidden between some apparently innocent comments. This sarcasm is directed towards both countries.
This book can also be used in a way to understand differences in ideological, theoretical and practical uses of certain academic disciplines or professional practices. For example, thinking of psychology, it is interesting how the book provides some enlightenment towards understanding the US's fixation on self-development, self-control, ego strengthening, delay of gratification, etc. Eagleton writes :
"The centered, repressive, self-disciplined ego of production and puritan values is at war with the decentered, liberated, consumerist self." (p.177).
In a country where external references or constrictions are avoided whilst proclaiming freedom as one of the ultimate values and aspirations, capitalism exploits the desire for improvement, self transcendence and the sense of limitless. The poor ego (as Freud once described it) gets caught between the need for satisfaction and the contradictory imperatives of renunciation and hedonistic consumption. Since the individual has sovereign authority in the US, no wonder that most individuals are preoccupied in developing their ego strength in order to control the instincts and the superego imperative to both consume and abstain.
To the reviewers that claim that Terry Eagleton does not like the US, I disagree. I find this critique much more balanced and fair than other critiques, especially the ones written by French writers.
This book can also be used in a way to understand differences in ideological, theoretical and practical uses of certain academic disciplines or professional practices. For example, thinking of psychology, it is interesting how the book provides some enlightenment towards understanding the US's fixation on self-development, self-control, ego strengthening, delay of gratification, etc. Eagleton writes :
"The centered, repressive, self-disciplined ego of production and puritan values is at war with the decentered, liberated, consumerist self." (p.177).
In a country where external references or constrictions are avoided whilst proclaiming freedom as one of the ultimate values and aspirations, capitalism exploits the desire for improvement, self transcendence and the sense of limitless. The poor ego (as Freud once described it) gets caught between the need for satisfaction and the contradictory imperatives of renunciation and hedonistic consumption. Since the individual has sovereign authority in the US, no wonder that most individuals are preoccupied in developing their ego strength in order to control the instincts and the superego imperative to both consume and abstain.
To the reviewers that claim that Terry Eagleton does not like the US, I disagree. I find this critique much more balanced and fair than other critiques, especially the ones written by French writers.
February 28, 2013
A collection of sharp-edged observations of America, with observations of England and Ireland thrown in for comparison: there is much that Mr. Eagleton writes that is spot on, even if he does tend to repeat himself interminably. He takes not one but two Virgil's to guide him through our Inferno: Alexis de Tocqueville (with some assists from Charles Dickens), and that most American of novelists, Henry James. I suppose that the waves of immigrants that washed ashore since Tocqueville, and the culture brought by the slaves freed after his visit, have had but a negligible impact on our ethos; and certainly one would be hard-pressed to think of more than a couple dozen novelists who have had their fingers on the pulse of America more than Henry James.
Ah well: perhaps I missed out on some of Eagleton's subtler points; I am, after all, an American, and have a difficult time perceiving, let alone appreciating, irony. Eagleton's contention that we are constitutionally inept at satire should lead to a new Birther Movement, focused on Stephen Colbert. More puzzling is his contention that the "vigilante spirit is largely foreign" to Ireland, which makes the actions of the IRA and the UDA kind of inconsequential.
Toward the end of the book, Eagleton states that "freedom is not inherently American, or hospitality particularly Arab. What an Iranian schoolteacher wants for her children is pretty much what a Californian bank clerk wants. One should recognize cultural differences, but not make a fetish of them." Hey, look: I found some irony! What do I win?
Ah well: perhaps I missed out on some of Eagleton's subtler points; I am, after all, an American, and have a difficult time perceiving, let alone appreciating, irony. Eagleton's contention that we are constitutionally inept at satire should lead to a new Birther Movement, focused on Stephen Colbert. More puzzling is his contention that the "vigilante spirit is largely foreign" to Ireland, which makes the actions of the IRA and the UDA kind of inconsequential.
Toward the end of the book, Eagleton states that "freedom is not inherently American, or hospitality particularly Arab. What an Iranian schoolteacher wants for her children is pretty much what a Californian bank clerk wants. One should recognize cultural differences, but not make a fetish of them." Hey, look: I found some irony! What do I win?
November 19, 2017
Offended? Not offended? Offended? Not Offended? As an American and especially, a mid westerner right smack in the center of America, some bits of this book made me want to chew Terry Eagleton's head off and stick it secretly into a Shepherds pie made for those close related and wedded ( inbred s)
cough cough, I mean royals. Yet, he swears it was done as flattery for his love and respect of us. Plus, while I am an American with a college education, I can agree with about half if not three quarters of the book. Our English language is messed up compared to the origins. But then Language is a child and when we parted from Britain way back in the 1400s yes, I said 1400s not the fifteenth century the way " ALL BRITS " do , the language parted from mother Brit and began a life of it's own. Which means change and making its own traditions independently of the isles. That being said, I love my America even with it's so called flaws and mistakes ( Except the Republican part- but that's a whole other hate essay). Needless to say, I'm being generous with a 3 star rating, simply because I like ( not love) dry Brit humor. There was plenty of that in Eagleton's mockery of our country. Controversy rolled within my soul, head and gut as I read this short quick book. IF it had been any longer, I might have reached a breaking point somewhere and been forced to write a hate letter to this ( well all Brits are stuck up arrogant ,,) Snob.
cough cough, I mean royals. Yet, he swears it was done as flattery for his love and respect of us. Plus, while I am an American with a college education, I can agree with about half if not three quarters of the book. Our English language is messed up compared to the origins. But then Language is a child and when we parted from Britain way back in the 1400s yes, I said 1400s not the fifteenth century the way " ALL BRITS " do , the language parted from mother Brit and began a life of it's own. Which means change and making its own traditions independently of the isles. That being said, I love my America even with it's so called flaws and mistakes ( Except the Republican part- but that's a whole other hate essay). Needless to say, I'm being generous with a 3 star rating, simply because I like ( not love) dry Brit humor. There was plenty of that in Eagleton's mockery of our country. Controversy rolled within my soul, head and gut as I read this short quick book. IF it had been any longer, I might have reached a breaking point somewhere and been forced to write a hate letter to this ( well all Brits are stuck up arrogant ,,) Snob.
November 8, 2013
I'm going to have to shelve this one. I know, it's sort of a disgrace considering I only read 63 pages of a 178-page book.
At first I thought it was really hilarious so I read quite a bit but then the book started to get dull to me. Eagleton lost his wit and went into some sort of professor road. And I know a lot of people may say something like: That's the natures of these types of books. But that's not true. This isn't my first book I've read about the culture between two countries. I'm a Francophile and I have read numerous books on French culture which I find fascinating.
And it's not like I'm uninterested in English culture. I was just living in London this past summer and I absolutely loved it. And so far everything I've noticed about the differences Eagleton has pointed out. So he is being through....he's even pointed out somethings that I didn't think about which I can agree with. I just find that I'm going to have to attack this book later on when I have time to dawdle around....like when I'm retired.
At first I thought it was really hilarious so I read quite a bit but then the book started to get dull to me. Eagleton lost his wit and went into some sort of professor road. And I know a lot of people may say something like: That's the natures of these types of books. But that's not true. This isn't my first book I've read about the culture between two countries. I'm a Francophile and I have read numerous books on French culture which I find fascinating.
And it's not like I'm uninterested in English culture. I was just living in London this past summer and I absolutely loved it. And so far everything I've noticed about the differences Eagleton has pointed out. So he is being through....he's even pointed out somethings that I didn't think about which I can agree with. I just find that I'm going to have to attack this book later on when I have time to dawdle around....like when I'm retired.
June 23, 2013
This book is sold as a humor book, so I was hoping for a sort of reverse "Notes From a Small Island" (Bill Bryson); but instead I found this book too serious for itself. I chuckled a few times, yes, but I found it a mostly repetitive and bloated discussion of the modern American physiology, complete with the Ego and Superego. I think that those serious themes have a time and place, but they should be sold appropriately. It was also odd the title refers to an "Englishman" but large sections of this book compare the Irish to Americans. I ended up not finishing it by about two chapters, I was over it.
September 7, 2014
Terry Eagleton has many interesting observations to make on US culture, society and politics. He's often insightful, but his attempt at wit often comes across as forced and heavy handed. It is the unfortunate influence of Slavoj Zizek that otherwise serious thinkers feel the need to make gratuitous pop culture references to appear relevant. Enduring the indiscriminate volleys of witticisms appear the price one has to pay to get to occasional brilliant insights hidden in this book.
August 28, 2013
Delightful reading. Incisive biting wit from cover to cover.
August 23, 2013
Eagleton's poking fun at Americans, Britons, and Irish is refreshing and delightful!
October 16, 2013
Hilarious.
August 5, 2017
Plenty of food for thought, but not quite as amusing as I'd hoped.
April 29, 2020
It is always a challenge for an amateur reader to try to read something slightly different than what he is used to. In my case, literary essays have never been my greatest pleasure, especially since I hate when an article is full of details, but, it is always an adventure to try to read something new. Across the pond is a book written by Terry Eagletown, a British literary theorist whom in this occasion narrates the differences of the American, Irish and British culture from the point of view of a British, himself. But not only is he British but also he is extremely close to the American culture due to the fact that his wife is American and, because of that, their children have a double nationality.
In my opinion, when talking about a book you have just read, it is important to highlight the things that have surprised you the most instead of starting to ramble about what you think some expressions that the author said really meant. The first thing that really made me think about what television shows about some cultures was that, according to the authors, Americans do not use irony. Probably if like me you have watched plenty of American sitcoms like Friends or Jane the Virgin you would disagree with the author because it is a fact that the scriptwriters use irony as the main resource to obtain a good laugh for the audience, nevertheless, Eagletown affirm that although Americans understand irony, they do not tend to use it. The reason for this is that they are really honest about their beliefs and thoughts and prefer not to confuse the listener by saying they do not mean something when they actually mean it. On the other hand, the irony is the most frequent resource to use in oral conversation for a British person which also was so disconcerting for me because I believe that in UK people was so polite that they did not have a sense of humour and, the irony is a kind of humour.
The second thing that shocked me the most being Spanish was the fact that Americans are really positive people, or, as the author says, they have angelic thinking. In my journey trying to understand what this expression actually meant I have come to the conclusion that, in a nutshell, it means that they are naïve. The two main reasons why I believe this is: they tend to think that everything is possible and they have a special ability to express their deepest thoughts. It is not a surprise because, again, we see it all the time in television, that Americans seem to think that they can get anything they want if they fight enough for it and, it is a common idea all over the country. From my perspective, this has no sense at all because for Spanish people it is more probable that you will fail following your dreams than that you will succeed in it. For that reason, most teens I know have decided to start a degree that can assure them a job when they finish it rather than the job of their dreams. Also, Eagletown says that Americans are really naïve because they tend to say everything they think to everyone, even if that person is a totally stranger, without thinking about the consequences of it. In Spain, people do not tend to start a conversation about deep thoughts and beliefs with a stranger but it is true that, at least in the south, we tend to be kind to everyone even if we do not know that person. You can see this especially in the relationship between shop assistants and costumers. So, summarising, Americans trust too much in people, Spanish people tend to be kind to each other and British think that everyone can be a potential killer or want to kidnap their children.
Last but least, I would like to highlight a very interesting fact about British that I think is very common in Spain as well: the author asserts that British people complain as a hobby, they enjoy complaining about everything and that is why they do nothing about it. Well, in fact, the conclusion of the writer is that the residents of the UK tend to groan about something that is not their duty to change for example the weather but it also says that even if they had the opportunity to change it they simply will not because they love to complain. In my country, it is more common to see people complain about something that thinking of ideas to solve their problems. In my opinion, both cultures should take a little of America’s positivity and believe that, at least, it is possible to change one of their problems.
In my opinion, when talking about a book you have just read, it is important to highlight the things that have surprised you the most instead of starting to ramble about what you think some expressions that the author said really meant. The first thing that really made me think about what television shows about some cultures was that, according to the authors, Americans do not use irony. Probably if like me you have watched plenty of American sitcoms like Friends or Jane the Virgin you would disagree with the author because it is a fact that the scriptwriters use irony as the main resource to obtain a good laugh for the audience, nevertheless, Eagletown affirm that although Americans understand irony, they do not tend to use it. The reason for this is that they are really honest about their beliefs and thoughts and prefer not to confuse the listener by saying they do not mean something when they actually mean it. On the other hand, the irony is the most frequent resource to use in oral conversation for a British person which also was so disconcerting for me because I believe that in UK people was so polite that they did not have a sense of humour and, the irony is a kind of humour.
The second thing that shocked me the most being Spanish was the fact that Americans are really positive people, or, as the author says, they have angelic thinking. In my journey trying to understand what this expression actually meant I have come to the conclusion that, in a nutshell, it means that they are naïve. The two main reasons why I believe this is: they tend to think that everything is possible and they have a special ability to express their deepest thoughts. It is not a surprise because, again, we see it all the time in television, that Americans seem to think that they can get anything they want if they fight enough for it and, it is a common idea all over the country. From my perspective, this has no sense at all because for Spanish people it is more probable that you will fail following your dreams than that you will succeed in it. For that reason, most teens I know have decided to start a degree that can assure them a job when they finish it rather than the job of their dreams. Also, Eagletown says that Americans are really naïve because they tend to say everything they think to everyone, even if that person is a totally stranger, without thinking about the consequences of it. In Spain, people do not tend to start a conversation about deep thoughts and beliefs with a stranger but it is true that, at least in the south, we tend to be kind to everyone even if we do not know that person. You can see this especially in the relationship between shop assistants and costumers. So, summarising, Americans trust too much in people, Spanish people tend to be kind to each other and British think that everyone can be a potential killer or want to kidnap their children.
Last but least, I would like to highlight a very interesting fact about British that I think is very common in Spain as well: the author asserts that British people complain as a hobby, they enjoy complaining about everything and that is why they do nothing about it. Well, in fact, the conclusion of the writer is that the residents of the UK tend to groan about something that is not their duty to change for example the weather but it also says that even if they had the opportunity to change it they simply will not because they love to complain. In my country, it is more common to see people complain about something that thinking of ideas to solve their problems. In my opinion, both cultures should take a little of America’s positivity and believe that, at least, it is possible to change one of their problems.
June 13, 2020
I generally like Terry Eagleton, but if there was ever a time to read this book, it's not now. With American culture coming apart at the seams, reading some privileged white guy criticizing Americans for their foibles and being glib about the centuries of pain that our history encompasses, just doesn't make me smile, much less laugh. And I'm meant to smile and laugh. My husband thought the book was hilarious (he's Australian, and so not a member of any group Eagleton is lampooning). It's not that I think American culture shouldn't be mocked--I regularly mock it myself--it's that Eagleton mocks it in such an intellectually lazy way. He shows off his ample erudition, and much of his humor assumes a familiarity with Western humanities, and given that I've done graduate work in European intellectual history and English and American literature, I'm in a good position to get his jokes. And I do get them. I just don't find them funny. His observations of Americans (and the Brits and the Irish) can be entertaining; it's when he talks about how they came to be that way that his reasoning is lazy, if sometimes whimsical. His view is also very narrow--he seems to think the country was founded by Puritans, and he keeps going back to "puritan values" (even as he observes much of American society at odds with them) as if the mid-Atlantic and Southern states had no influence on American culture. He would probably think his lack of intellectual rigor a strange criticism, since the book is hardly a work of scholarship. Can't I see that he's just lightheartedly riffing on bits and pieces of culture that he finds fascinating? That he's not trying to be rigorous--that intellectual rigor is scarcely the point? Can't we just have a bit of fun? Well, sure, but at this point in time, seven years and countless tragedies since the book was published, it seems in exceedingly bad taste. It's possible he might think so, too, and in any event, I doubt he would have written it now.
November 15, 2022
Reading this book as an American was like being made aware of water as a fish.
It's an unfortunate fact of life that we can't see everything about ourselves from our own perspectives. We have blind spots that we require input from others to fill in. Because of this, we should be eager to receive that input. Many Americans, unfortunately, behave sort of like Narcissists, and cannot tolerate anything that sounds remotely like criticism - even when it's delivered with the best of intentions.
This is actually a really, really important book. It's also very readable. I laughed very hard a handful of times, so that was good. For many parts, it made me feel simultaneously sick and thankful. Sick at seeing how much of what passes for normal here being exposed for what it is... and thankful that it all doesn't pass for normal in other parts of the world.
I feel like I could've travelled internationally and not received the depths of the insights here. If you're an American, read this book!
It's an unfortunate fact of life that we can't see everything about ourselves from our own perspectives. We have blind spots that we require input from others to fill in. Because of this, we should be eager to receive that input. Many Americans, unfortunately, behave sort of like Narcissists, and cannot tolerate anything that sounds remotely like criticism - even when it's delivered with the best of intentions.
This is actually a really, really important book. It's also very readable. I laughed very hard a handful of times, so that was good. For many parts, it made me feel simultaneously sick and thankful. Sick at seeing how much of what passes for normal here being exposed for what it is... and thankful that it all doesn't pass for normal in other parts of the world.
I feel like I could've travelled internationally and not received the depths of the insights here. If you're an American, read this book!
November 17, 2025
The cover picture is a bit odd -- it appears to show a bowler-hatted gentleman sitting in a lifeguard's seat and looking through binoculars, but he has hips that would have done credit to Marilyn Monroe.
Terry Eagleton has taught in universities on both sides of the Atlantic, so he is well placed to generalise about the cultural differences between the British Isles and the USA.
The chapter on language differences is frequently hilarious, but despite being only ten years old, most of the words he lists as distinctively American have already become commonplace in British speech. The chapter on "Mortal Bodies and Immortal Souls" is quite tediously theological in tone, and the rest of the book doesn't entirely recover from the shock.
Still, an entertaining read.
Terry Eagleton has taught in universities on both sides of the Atlantic, so he is well placed to generalise about the cultural differences between the British Isles and the USA.
The chapter on language differences is frequently hilarious, but despite being only ten years old, most of the words he lists as distinctively American have already become commonplace in British speech. The chapter on "Mortal Bodies and Immortal Souls" is quite tediously theological in tone, and the rest of the book doesn't entirely recover from the shock.
Still, an entertaining read.
November 21, 2017
The pomo literary critic weighs in on his impressions of the British, Irish and American character. He is largely right about Americans. I will take under consideration what he says about Irish and English. He starts off with wry amusement at the peculiarities of Americans (what is it that so attracts aliens to abduct so many Americans, among all the choices on the planet?), but the more he goes on, the more his prose betrays the mush-mouth complexities of the pomo style. A short book, but hard to actually finish.
I think I might try looking at it again, in the near future, when I might have more time to focus solyly on his rather meaty (or mushy?) prose style.
I think I might try looking at it again, in the near future, when I might have more time to focus solyly on his rather meaty (or mushy?) prose style.
Read
June 13, 2018Quaint and quirky the way only a lightweight book of observations from a British don would be. I am glad that Terry Eagleton points out that while ''America is Best!'' rednecky attitudes are terrible and laughable, the obverse attitude of Americans eager to accept that they are the worst national characters ever is equally untrue and unfortunate. Prof Eagleton takes the time to poke fun at the behavioral features of English, Irish, and American equally, genially and never acerbically. I am glad that he takes an appreciative view of American tourists, naming them polite and eager to please and be pleased, even if they are not as culturally informed of the countries they are visiting.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 82 reviews