Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet or computer – no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Follow the author
OK
The Myth of Meritocracy: Why Working Class Kids Still Get Working Class Jobs (Provocations) by James Bloodworth (2016-05-16) Hardcover – 1 Jan. 1853
Purchase options and add-ons
- PublisherBiteback Publishing
- Publication date1 Jan. 1853
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Product details
- ASIN : B01K3JM7LW
- Publisher : Biteback Publishing (1 Jan. 1853)
- Customer reviews:
About the author
James Bloodworth is an English writer and the author of two books, The Myth of Meritocracy and Hired: Six Months Undercover in Low-Wage Britain. His work has appeared in the Times, the Guardian, the New York Review of Books, the New Statesman and elsewhere. He is on Twitter as @J_Bloodworth and Instagram: James.Bloodworth
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings, help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyses reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonReviews with images
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from United Kingdom
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
It opens with a questionable statement, that politicians seldom talk about reducing inequality, when I would have thought that plenty of politicians were forever talking about reducing inequality. However it is bang up to date, peppered with press stories, academic and left wing writings, written with real gusto and enthusiasm.There is no doubting where the author’s sympathies lie, and the book is all the better for it.
My reservations are that often you need to read a sentence a few times to follow its meaning. A few more redrafts could have produced a far stronger final version. A more sociological/anthropological view would also have been useful. Quite rightly most people’s aspirations are to end up with a similar sort of job to their parents', living in a similar sort of place. Most people do not want the upheaval of radical social mobility.
The book was very easy to read. Each chapter had a clear theme but collectively, the chapters read as one and the book flowed nicely. In terms of references, I liked the way the author weaved into the book core theories/texts (e.g. the Bell Curve) without inundating the reader with an overwhelming amount of statistics.
I particularly liked the chapter regarding grammar schools; I attended a state grammar school myself and was fed the romanticism about how they foster social mobility and help working-class kids. In reality, most people in my year had been privately tutored to pass the entrance exam and one boy I know was tutored for almost 3 years! Thus, personally, I can relate to the ideas the author discusses.
Overall, a fantastic read and I look forward to quoting this text in my future University essays (maybe even my dissertation, who knows). Hopefully James will write more books in the future.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 26 July 2016
The book was very easy to read. Each chapter had a clear theme but collectively, the chapters read as one and the book flowed nicely. In terms of references, I liked the way the author weaved into the book core theories/texts (e.g. the Bell Curve) without inundating the reader with an overwhelming amount of statistics.
I particularly liked the chapter regarding grammar schools; I attended a state grammar school myself and was fed the romanticism about how they foster social mobility and help working-class kids. In reality, most people in my year had been privately tutored to pass the entrance exam and one boy I know was tutored for almost 3 years! Thus, personally, I can relate to the ideas the author discusses.
Overall, a fantastic read and I look forward to quoting this text in my future University essays (maybe even my dissertation, who knows). Hopefully James will write more books in the future.
The book though stylistically readable and the points it wishes to make done comprehensively and convincingly enough, one can’t help but thinking that we’ve heard all of the contents before, in some statistical variation or another. Can anyone really claim to be ignorant of the central message, that education is vital for social mobility and yet private schools grant overwhelming advantages to their pupils and even good comprehensive and grammar schools are unfairly exploited by wily middle class parents? This point is made relentlessly throughout the piece, in a fashion somewhat ad nauseam. However any solutions to these problems are sadly not forthcoming and we can only hope that we might find them in his next explosive work of provocation.
Neither are there any extensive or thought provoking explanations as to why British state run education is in such a sorry state of affairs. Bloodworth is yet another socialist who refuses to seriously wrestle with the problem of nearly 150 years’ worth of state control of education producing such dismal results, under Conservative and Labour government alike. Why after so much public money has been spent do we still have a stubborn rate of nearing 20% functional illiteracy? Is it just another state run project that needs more funds and more time to succeed or are there other dynamics at work?
Does Bloodworth have any thoughts to offer us on the alchemy that seems to take place behind the doors of those private schools that he seems to despise so much and why it’s similarly lacking in the state sector? Or equally if the award winning state run systems in countries like Finland do so well, why can’t we seem to replicate them in the UK? How would Bloodworth fix our education system, that this author knows first-hand, is characterised not by academic excellence but instead by immense bureaucracy in service of delivering a ‘post-modern’ educational experience? (whatever that’s meant to be).
In addition to all of the above does Bloodworth have any thoughts on the wider social influences that effect the underperformance of working class children and what role the welfare state and government intervention has played in exacerbating them? A key example being his complaint that the nation is divided by homeownership and the inequality that it entrenches. And it’s hard not to find oneself in violent agreement with him on this point, but can’t he see that exorbitant house prices are the product of overbearing government planning and regulations? Correctly identifying the symptom, does his loyalty to the noble socialist endeavour blind him from seeing the state as the problem and the free market as its solution?
If Bloodworth does have any answers to these questions then he is certainly doing a good job of keeping his cards close to his chest. However what is more likely is that he is simply engaged in something not too similar to what Marx once chided as the work of the bourgeois historian, being mesmerized and in Bloodworth’s case horribly indignant about superficialities and little else besides.
What's more is that all of this is couched within a rather ambivalent and anaemically pursued murmur of an ideological dissent from the idea that a meritocracy even on its own terms would be desirable. In a vague and fabulously uninspiring note of conclusion Bloodworth says that, ‘There ought to be no shame in not wanting to compete or in being found to lack the requisite ‘merit’ to do so.’. Once again he doesn’t care to give any explanation or development of what his position really is with regards to this curious statement, however what is clear is that Bloodworth seems uncomfortable with the principle that individuals should be granted the rights to live, trade and operate in a free and open society. The immense collective wealth that is generated through the operation of the free market characteristically receiving no mention, Bloodworth instead rallies to the defence of those who would wish to constrain the rights of the successful to liberty and freedom, in order to placate the bitter sentiments of those who haven’t performed as well.
A man of few words with regards to critical instruction or interpretation, Bloodworth’s style of provocation has not the qualities of a bang but a whimper.