There’s a book that I was introduced to at a church book club nearly two years ago that has really stayed with me. It’s called The Road to Character by David Brooks. He’s a NY Time op-editor, PBS NewsHour Friday commentator, NPR Newshour contributor, etc. A talking head, but a seriously thoughtful talking head. This man is smart and ethical. Everything he says is carefully considered. Even if you don’t agree with him (and I don’t always), he’s worth listening to.
I’ve read The Road to Character several times over the past two years and in February I am going to lead a discussion about it at Hubby’s book club through the Braille and Talking Book Library. Dragon is rounding up all of her friends to attend so we hope to have a rousing discussion.
I’ve been wanting to write a review of the book here for some time but I never got around to it. I find that now I have a perfect opportunity. I’ve developed the book club discussion questions and I’ll simply pose and respond to them one at a time after the discussion. If you’ve read the book, or if these questions encourage you to read the book, that’s great. I think you’ll find the questions thought-provoking regardless. You’ve got until mid-February before I start rolling out the rest of this series.
So, what does Brooks do in this book that would make you want to tune in? He focuses on what defines a person’s character: ethics, maturity, humility, dignity, community contribution, and the ability to forge strong emotional connections to family and close friends. As examples, he uses ten famous historical figures from New Deal labor leader Frances Perkins, to Civil Rights figure Bayard Rustin, to writer George Eliot, to Dwight Eisenhower, to George C. Marshall (of the Marshall Plan) to St. Augustine. Religion is not a requirement for character, neither is leading a traditionally “sinless” life. But having a strong ethical center is.
Here are the questions I’ll be covering:
1. Are you a moral romantic, who believes in human goodness and the ability of the individual to discern good from evil based on their internal compass, or a moral realist, who relies on an understanding of humans as fundamentally flawed with a penchant for sin? Do you have to believe in one view or the other? Is there a middle ground, or another outlook?
2. When are the resume virtues – the characteristics you would use to describe yourself in the job market such as “team player” and “punctual” – more important than the eulogy virtues – the characteristics such as “loyal” and “family-oriented” that might be used to desribe you at your funeral? Are they in conflict in your life? How can they work in harmony for a balanced life?
3. How does the modern, high-pressure meritocracy impact the search for human meaning? How does the pressure to “make something of yourself” damage your ability to cultivate the eulogy virtues?
4. Do you believe your personal feelings are the best indicator for what is right and wrong? Do you believe that you know you’re doing the right thing when you feel good inside about it? Are a set of stable, external values and expectations necessary in life?
5. Do you believe in the importance of instititions to society? Do you believe in devoting considerable personal time and resources to institutions that will outlive you? Think about churches, patriotism, schools, etc.
6. Brooks states that the Victorians were inarticulate about sex and we are inarticulate about morality – that we have lost our moral vocabularly. What are the consequences of being morally inarticulate?
7. John Stuart Mill said that people had a responsibility to become more moral over time. Do you believe this? Is life a moral drama as opposed to a hedonistic or self-involved one? Does this apply to societies as well as individuals?
8. Compare the impact of the socially unacceptable sexual practices of Bayard Rustin and George Eliot. Where does Brooks draw a line and judge their behavior? What values and standards is he using to make his conclusions?
9. When is it appropriate to move from Little Me – humble and self-effacing as personified by Eunides – to Big Me – brash and self-aggrandazing as personified by Joe Namath? Katherine Graham, editor of the Washington Post, changed herself from a reticent personality to a strong, assertive one that took on presidential administrations – and won. Yet she didn’t lose her poise or become a braggart. What does it take for a person to move onto the world stage and assert themselves and their ideas and not lose their humility or dignity?
10. Did this book change your thoughts about Millennials and even younger Americans? Brooks spends considerable time comparing surveys of college students in the 60s and the 2000s. He often portrays Millenials as delicate snowflakes with unrealistic exepctations for their lives. Is he being fair to them?
11. How does a view of history and the human experience as a circular pattern where opposing interests and values compete and give way to one another over time compete with Brooks? Do you see history as more circular, or more linear?
12. Do you believe in Brooks’s assertions that humans are inherently flawed sinners? Does he put too much emphasis on that aspect of human nature? How much focus on our baser instincts is necessary to keep them in check?
13. Is morality the central drama of your life – is it what gives purpose and meaning to your life? If not, what is (family, work, friendships, etc. are other possibilities)? Do you think morality is an appropriate goal for life?
Plum Librarian LLC 