Like the rest of the country, I really became addicted to Malcolm Gladwell’s books. His pop sociology angle was fun and slick. It worked very well in his book lengths works, but he has finally stumbled in my mind with his shorter writings. What the Dog Saw is a collection of 19 articles he wrote for The New Yorker. The topics are the kind of things that I love from Gladwell: “Are Smart People Overrated?”; “What the Inventor of the Birth Control Pill Didn’t Know About Women’s Health.”; “What Do Job Interviews Really Tell Us?”
Look I probably accidently sold you on this book. The problem with these articles is that the spark is gone. Is it really Gladwell’s fault though? He wrote these articles for The New Yorker, not the general public. These articles are so dull and lifeless that I assume they fit right in with the magazine. No, I do not read The New Yorker. I’ve been told that magazine is for smart people. I only pretend to be smart, so I am not interested. Gladwell is still a talented writer, but I’m just going to stick with his full-length work.