Talking to Strangers: What We Should Know about the People We Don't Know

Well-written, an easy read. Lots of interesting stories? But, and it is a big but ... What is the point of the book? There don't seen to be any startling insights. The vignettes are over-used and repetitive. There's almost nothing on solutions. In conclusion, a shallow second-rate book. Pity ...

Sorry, but I did not like this book. The best thing I can say is that it is well-written, very fluent and conversational as one would expect from a top New Yorker writer. I have never read anything else by Malcolm Gladwell as far as I know, but I was curious and even a bit excited to try this out because he is so well known for influential books such as The Tipping Point. However, I'm afraid this book has nothing to say. It is a compendium of interesting crime cases and celebrated moments from history and popular culture, ranging from Hitler to Friends to 9/11 and a whole load of controversial court cases, with some examination of suicide as a diversion. For the first half of it - and it's a very quick read, so do give it a try if you are inclined to doubt my criticism - I just found myself wondering: “where is he going with this? What is the thesis? What is his point?” Ostensibly the book is about whether or not we can judge strangers. I think. But many of the examples that he draws on have no apparent lesson. Many of them are nice little vignettes which show how broad-ranging the author's mind is, and would make good “dinner party anecdotes” - but rather in a mansplaining vein, where you tell someone that what they think about Chamberlain and Hitler is so wrong because there's so much more to it... But actually they’re right. There are digressions via Cuban spies, Bernie Madoff, Jerry Sandusky and Amanda Knox. All nicely told. But what does the book actually tell us? Sorry Mr Gladwell. I got nothing.

Let me start with what Malcolm Gladwell believes happened in the Sandra Bland case. During the 1970s, there was an experiment conducted in Kansas City, Missouri, which found that increased police patrols had no effect on crime. During the 1990s, a similar experiment, again conducted in Kansas City, instead targeted extra police patrols in very specific high-crime areas - and by very specific I mean city blocks, not streets, blocks. That experiment was incredibly effective and demonstrated that stopping individuals for very minor traffic infractions led to an increase in arrests, gun seizures, drug seizures, and, most importantly, crime. Law enforcement agencies around the country took notice; sadly, they walked away with the wrong lesson. The officer who stopped Sandra Bland that fateful day had been trained to stop potentially suspicious individuals for very little reason. He was further trained to look for evidence of guilt rather than assuming anyone was just going about their business. Why? Because law enforcement agencies extrapolated and thought that what worked well in a very specific high-crime area would also work everywhere else. That just wasn’t the case. It led to an overly suspicious police force and, of course, the general populace growing increasing wary of encountering police. It also unfortunately disproportionately impacted African Americans and ultimately led to the Black Lives Matter movement. I am a HUGE fan of Malcolm Gladwell's work. He singlehandedly taught me to appreciate nonfiction. His books are both informative and entertaining, educational but really enjoyable to read. Outliers in particular has stuck with me. I also enjoyed his other books, not counting What the Dog Saw, which was a bit different from the others. In any case, I have been looking forward to Talking to Strangers since I first heard of its upcoming release. It does not disappoint. I have a master's degree in anthropology, so Gladwell's own description of Talking to Strangers spoke to me immediately. After listing high-profile examples including Sandra Bland, Brock Turner, and Amanda Knox, Gladwell says: “In all of these cases, the parties involved relied on a set of strategies to translate one another's words and intentions. And in each case, something went very wrong. In Talking to Strangers, I want to understand those strategies—analyze them, critique them, figure out where they came from, find out how to fix them.” Largely using high-profile cases with which readers will be familiar, Malcolm Gladwell wants to teach us how to communicate better with those who are different. He presents us with two puzzles: First, why can't we tell when the stranger is front of us is lying to our face? (ANSWER: Because we default to truth. Society could not function otherwise. There don't just need to be red flags for us to recogniz...

Malcolm Gladwell is a gifted writer who engages our minds and emotions in his works of non-fiction. In "Talking to Strangers,” he tells us true stories that, at first, seem to be unrelated. A police stop ends in tragedy; Neville Chamberlain and other political figures famously misconstrued Hitler's bellicose intentions; experienced judges grant bail to defendants who, they realize too late, should have remained in jail; the sociopath, Bernie Madoff, conducted a fraudulent investment scheme for years, deceiving many individuals who thought that he was a genius at making money; Amanda Knox served prison time for a murder that she did not commit. Studies show that most of us who encounter apparently benevolent individuals are predisposed to believe that they are not putting on an act. Conversely, when we meet a man or woman who behaves weirdly or inappropriately, we are likely to jump to negative conclusions about him or her, even when there is little hard evidence to support our assumptions. The author suggests that many of us have an inflated opinion of our ability to size up people. Research suggests that we are not as objective as we would like to believe, and are therefore prone to misinterpret comments, intonations, facial expressions, and gestures. Moreover, we do not always realize that people whose backgrounds differ from ours may communicate in unfamiliar ways. Gladwell asks: How did double-agents who telegraphed their guilt get away with their treasonous behavior for so long? Why didn't everyone recognize Madoff for what he is—a ruthless swindler? Which of Amanda Knox's personality traits, remarks, and deeds convinced Italian authorities that she killed her roommate? These compelling examples raise intriguing questions about why we sometimes reach erroneous conclusions when we assess the truthfulness of our fellow human beings. it should be noted that a few chapters in this book—such as the essays on suicide, young adults who drink so heavily that they black out, and the efforts of police to cut down on crime—are thought-provoking but oversimplified and not particularly relevant to Gladwell's central premise. Still, this work of non-fiction is an entertaining and enlightening wake-up call. We should be cautious when we decide who our friends are as opposed to who is likely to stab us in the back. Too often we are dead wrong.