Jared Diamond readers - Collapse vs. Guns, Germs, and Steel

I read and LOVED Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel but I have been trying unsuccessfully to get through Collapse since it first came out. It seems more repetitive and less interesting than GG&S. I stopped reading at Chapter 6 over a year ago. Does anyone else have this problem? Is this book work trying to push through?

I didn't even make it as far as you in Collapse ... I just found myself entirely uninterested in the book. I'll try it again someday, but I've put it aside for now.

I liked them both. With Collapse, I think you can choose the chapters that interest you (I liked the chapters about Greenland) and skip the others without missi9ng too much.

Has anyone read any of Mr. Diamond's books? Are they worth reading?

They're good, but as a good counterbalance, I'd suggest reading the book The Central Liberal Truth, which is a book about how culture influences progress, or what Thomas Friedman describes as the "intangible" elements.

Also, there's a pretty good dialogue/debate between Victor Davis Hanson and Jared Diamond that used to be available for download on NPR's website.

In short, I think that these recommendations will balance your view and show that Diamond's thesis, while very valuable and mostly true, is overstated.

I loved Diamond's book The Third Chimpanzee

I think Collapse book is worth reading - I thought his examples were pretty interesting.

But ultimately, I thought the message was a bit more mixed and weaker than in Guns, Germs, and Steel, where he basically argues environmental determinism (people develop the resources they have, e.g. domesticable animals were distributed across Eurasia). In Collapse, he gets a bit more hedgy - the Easter Island society failed from continued deforestation (a choice), while the northern Viking colonies (Iceland, Greenland, those islands, etc) failed because conditions got harsher the further away from homeland (essentially environmental). What his book and examples are good at is outlining when (and what) conditions vs. choices are important for failure (and success), but there's not really one satisfying overarching explanation for all of the examples, including that of modern America.

But then, which would be more frightening? If the success or failure of a society as a whole was entirely due to choice, or entirely due to environmental (or some other) determinism?

My two cents.

I haven't even gotten through GGS yet. Just couldn't get into it.

It took me a while to get into GGS -- but then, I first attempted it at thirteen. Or, um. Fourteen. Because I inherited my grandpa's copy. Don't think I got through it until, I dunno, 15 or 16. So. :p Collapse really sucked me in, though. I basically read straight through it. Twice.

At the end the Collapse case studies come together, though, when Diamond teased out factors that allowed societies to come to terms (or not) about the limits of their resources, e.g., the tragedy of the commons (that tiny Pacific Island escaped it), leadership (shoguns are reason Japan has forests today), etc.

I found Collapse to be the most important book I've read in the last 50 years and did not find it tedious al all. The depth and breadth of research that this man did is astonishing. How so much information could be contained in one head is a mystery. In my view Collapse will go down as one of the most significant books of the 21st century. I can only hope on behalf of my children and grandchildren that its warnings are heeded. I'm reviewing this book at my book club next week.

I think that the thesis of Guns, Germs, and Steel is a little more straightforward, which made it easier to get through. In the case of Collapse, he had a lot more variables to contend with, and unlike with the former volume, he had to examine the variables in parallel in most of the cases.

I think it comes together in the end... but I do agree that Collapse is more difficult to get through. I think because of the above, Collapse had less of an overall narrative and at times felt more like it was just a compilation of lists. It's still well worth the read, but perhaps do it in bits and pieces to maintain your interest.

It helps to look at Collapse as a follow-up to G, G, & S. Yes, the former tends to repeat itself and is not the equal of the latter. It does apply the theories laid out in G, G, & S, however. While not as essential, Collapse is still a good read.

I found GGS highly stimulating, but then I am an historian by training and work in the area of world systems studies / world history. I felt there were some probelms with the unilinear ecological determinism, because in human societies nature is experienced and mediated through human activity, both material production and culture. Thus depending on the kind of social systems you have in place, the impact of a natural disaster varies from place to place. In other words, climate can cause a harvest failure, but it takes a political decision to make a famine. See Mike Davis Late Victorian Holocausts on this.

Collapse on the other hand shows precisely the point I am making. However I was disturbed by Diamond's ready acceptance of dictatorships as the solution. The record of Trujillo in the Dominican republic on most things is terrible; and environmental protection does not comepnsate for human rigths abuses. AFter all the Nazis were some of the biggest protectors of the environment and creators of national parks in German history. They still killed about 40 million people. And knowing a fair bit about how local people view the Ok Tedi mining venture in New Guinea I felt that he had been well and truly suckered by corporate spin. Some interesting ideas in Collapse but the book has to be taken carefully.

While it has been a while since I read Collapse, I don't remember dictatorships being presented as a solution per se; maybe this is just how I came to it, but I read it as stating the unfortunate fact that free societies are not always so good at environmentalism. Which is, obviously, true--as you said, the Nazis created many national parks in Germany.

It's an obvious fact that dictatorships can udertake anything more easily and thoroughly that a democracy. Nature of the beasts.
Diamond did not sanction or excuse dactatorship.

Conversely, human activity is mediated by nature and I believe Diamond acknowldged these things. (A reading of The Meme Machine can expand the idea of a degree similarity between diverse societies' reactions to their environments.)
I would not apply it as a blanket rule that it takes a political decision to create a famine, particularly in an ancient isolated society in a harsh environment. (The mystrious Anasazi, say.)

One thing I've learned about experts in many fields is that they become so invested in their beliefs that they will actively try to discredit any other theory. They then come to dislike any idea that there might be a plethora of agents working on a situation.
(There was a fight in some local schools a few years back between teaching reading through phonics or immersion. The obvious answer is that these methods both need to be used in appropriate settings. The local experts were too caught up fighting for one or the other to appreciate this. Maybe I'll fleash this out later. I gotta go.)

Collapse stands on it own but some material is cannibalized from his earlier book - which does the same with his earlier book third chimpanzee. The difference is each book develops a common idea - Dr Diamond's hobby horse. Details are really what makes collapse worth the reading - each chapter seems to stand alone to pick and choose.

I skipped the first chapters - about Montana - maybe its a better read for Americans, but I found it comparatively boring compared to the rest of the book - the stuff that really had me engrossed was the chapters on Iceland, Greenland, vineland and on the colonization of hokiado by the Japanese.

I found reading ecological imperialism had some overlap and support of some of the bigger themes.

The chapter on the maya was okay, I later found another book 1491 that I really enjoyed much more on the topic. Stolen continents is also a good read.

The Chapter on Easter Island didn't leave any lasting impression - i guess it depends how familiar you are with the evidence on that one.

One more thing. The comparison of the viking colony obstinantly holding onto customs - holding onto a cattle culture, even avoiding fish!! while the technology of the 'inuits' was right in their faces is worth picking up the book alone.

I love both, although I think that GGS is the better of the two. I also really appreciated the meticulous citation in GGS, which is abbreviated in Collapse. It is funny that one reader skipped the chapter in Collapse on Montana - I read that to my husband and it really shocked him, because most Americans think of Montana as a wild, untouched place and he was amazed at the level of environmental destruction there. I think Collapse is actually a great book for people that don't believe that we should limit our impact on the environment - if they don't want to conserve for moral/philosophical reasons, they might out of pure self interest.

Reading GGS was like reading all my own pet theories about colonialism, only backed up with an incredible amount of data. I particularly enjoy the insight about spread of agricultural techniques and organisms along latitudinal but not longitudinal lines.

I noticed a bit of a dragging/repetitiveness in Collapse that I didn't get from Guns, Germs, and Steel, however I think that was partly due to him really trying to impart the seriousness of environmental destruction. Part three could stand on it's own, but without the earlier examples it might not have as great a force.

I haven't read Collapse but I thought that Guns, Germs, and Steel mainly re-worked the same info. from Alfred Crosby's Columbian Exchange.

If you liked Collapse, then you might also enjoy Sick Societies by Robert B. Edgerton.

I've been reading about the development of the human race, evolution, civilization etc for decades. Jared's book was engrossing, as it touched on so many facets of human progress and retrogression throughout the ages. If anybody is interested in this sort of thing, I can recommend two books by a gent called J F de Villiers, "The Origins of Passions - an Anthropomorphic Perspective", African University Press 1994, as well as "The Venus Code" for which I haven't got the publisher handy, as I've lent out the book to a friend.
Batear

I read and loved Collapse. i found it quite fascinating. GG&S however was harder for me to get into and I still havent finished it. I read Third Chimpanzee and really liked that. Overall i think he is a decent writer. If you have trouble reading Collapse trying getting the audio book. its like listening to a radio broadcast of current events, if you like that kind of thing.

#18 - I read about that in a New Yorker review of Collapse and it has haunted me since. I have the book, but haven't read it yet - partly b/c the thought of a society killing its calves (thereby sealing its fate) while refusing to eat fish is so profoundly sad and shortsighted.

As mentioned above, Ecological Imperialism by Crosby is good. Another title that's good, though I read it a long time ago, is Pan's Travail: Environmental Problems of the Ancient Greeks and Romans.

I thought Diamond's chapter on the island of Tikopia was a revelation. As was the unexpected genius of one of Diamond's students, who, when told of the Easter Island tragedy, asked, "What were they thinking?"

There was a piece of correspondence in last week's Nature from the authors of Questioning Collapse regarding Diamond's review of that book. Has anyone read McAnany's book?

McAnany makes the point that in times of profound societal change not everyone winds up dead and that these two things are often conflated.

Among other specific points where she picks apart Collapse she mentions that the Rwandan genocide was not 'Malthusian' and cites Christopher Taylor (whom I'm unfamiliar with) - but this notion struck me because I recently read We wish to inform you that tomorrow we will be killed with our families in which Gourevitch argues that the genocide was largely induced by political reasons.

Thoughts?

I have read both GG&S and Collapse. Thought they both were good books, well researched and well written.

I just don't totally agree with the premise of either books. Not saying he is completely wrong, just don't think he is completely correct.

And I laugh about the comments here on the Montana chapter of the book. I grew up in Missoula, Montana, the "north" end of the Bitterroot Valley. And everything he says about it is basically true. The forest fires have been so devastating there, because forest management has been so bad. If you don't manage the forest, i.e. do selective cutting and clearing, the forest fires will become un-manageable. In a large part, some of the negative ecological impact is caused by environmentalist themselves.

And that area of Montana is a wasteland of jobs. Of all my good friends in High School, only one has remained in Montana, and even then, he now lives in Helena, after 10 years in Denver, Colorado. His wife was born and raised in Hamilton, Montana, in the heart of the Bitterroot Valley. We all moved away, because there is no industry there to sustain our families.

I was impressed with Diamond's ability to recognize that environmentalism isn't in and of itself, the "magic" bullet. Stupid policies are stupid, weather they were implemented for environmental reasons or not. And that is the part of Diamond that I appreciated, even though I don't agree with every premise in either book.

Bill Masom

obviously mistakes have been made by environmentalists.... but I'll take those mistakes over those of the opposite position any day.

I agree with fannyprice. GGS was stupendous! It's a definite reread, giving much food for thought. Collapse is of great interest, too. But whereas GGS devotes each chapter to a different aspect of the human story, each chapter of Collapse covers one particular micro-society, such as Easter Island or Greenland, and addresses a checklist of factors that led to its unique circumstances that culminated in collapse or sustainability.

I admit that I did not "read" Collapse, but I listened to it on cd during long trips. Some of it seemed repetitive, but it succeeds in its purpose. The fact that many far-flung societies had the same problems, even lack of foresight, does make for a less enticing read after several chapters, but not a less important one. Both are excellent works of scholarship and useful as references.

I would take the time to read any of Jared Diamond's writings.

I liked both books and feel each has its merit. Guns, Germs and Steel came across as more academic than Collapse, with the latter proving to be an easier read. The messages contained in both books have stayed with me.

His work certainly makes us look at history from a different angle - and that is always profitable.

The overall problem with the argument of environmental determinism is that while it does make sense, it doesn't take into account the counter features of empire and the stipping effect it can have on a culture. I do not believe that Diamond, as a biologist, goes into that factor as much as he should. It's like the nature v. nurture argument; both are only components of an overall composition. Diamond's thesis is a little too simplistic and rational to hold water over time. It's simply not as easy as all that.