Book Club: Gang Leader for a Day, by Sudhir Venkatesh

*Note: The author of this book, Sudhir Venkatesh, has a very long name. There are way too many letters in Venkatesh for me to type it over and over. In fact, my fingers are exhausted from the three times I've already typed it. Therefore, the author will be referred to as S.V. from here on out.*

One of the most popular chapters in Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner's book Freakonomics centers on the economics of a Chicago street gang. So you can imagine people were excited when they got word of Gang Leader for a Day, written by the man responsible for the studies profiled in that chapter. The book is a chance for this self-styled 'rogue sociologist' to take us deeper into a world many know nothing about. (In fairness, the whole 'rogue sociologist' thing could be a marketing ploy - Freakonomics' subtitle refers to a 'rogue economist.' I, for one, am somewhat alarmed at the sudden rise in rogue -ists running around the streets of our nation. Someone should do something.)

And, as an expansion on that same Freakonomics chapter, I suppose S.V.'s book is OK. There are many more pages to work with here, so we get more time, more characters, and more anecdotes. But I had several problems with the book that kept me from enjoying it as a much as I wanted to.

Power. No matter how embedded he was or felt, S.V. was not black. He was not poor. He neither lived in nor grew up in the projects. And, unlike the residents of Robert Taylor Homes, he could leave whenever he wanted. Even when he didn't want to leave, the gang members would often shield him from especially brutal or sensitive events. Is any of this particularly S.V.'s fault? No. We're all stuck with our own perspective. Forgive the moment of solipsism, but no one can ever truly transcend the blessing/curse of subjectivity. S.V., though, is so far out of his element that it feels like anthropomorphizing when he attempts to talk about people's motives. He dehumanizes in his very attempt to humanize.

Numbers. Maybe I'm a geek. Maybe I would have been better off reading his dissertation. But Gang Leader for a Day seemed surprisingly low on data. This is a book of stories, not information.

Motive. On multiple occasions, S.V. wonders why he is studying this community, and what he hopes to get out of his research. Even with these doubts, we see him crossing lines to get what he needs. He indulges residents' delusions of grandeur by allowing them to believe he's writing about them individually, rather than the community as a whole. He betrays people's confidence when he thinks it will help his research. Eventually, he justifies his actions by deciding that, like many of the buildings residents, he's a hustler. To make matters worse, that isn't even his own conclusion, but something told to him by one of the residents, and he clings to the idea like a life saver.

As I said earlier, I really wanted to like this book. Maybe I went in with unrealistic expectations, but I left feeling hollow and disappointed, like I had just eaten a candy bar when what I really wanted was something salty. Don't get me wrong - S.V. did something fascinating in exploring the lives of a hidden segment of society. But Gang Leader doesn't do it any justice.

Personally, I might have liked the book better if he had gotten his ass kicked at least once for his impudence, his naivete and his condescension, a la the late Dr. Hunter S. Thompson in Hell's Angels.

A Little Off the Top 04/17/2008

I've been neglecting my link dump lately, so let's get right to it:

Slate has an interesting look at game theory as it applies to dinner party guests. It turns out, ladies, that I'm getting more desirable with age. Better get me while you still can...

UC Berkeley's Boalt School of Law has declined to fire John Yoo, best known for authoring a Justice Department memo justifying the US military's use of torture in Iraq. Though this isn't the place I'dve chosen to make a stand, in some ways it's nice to see the alma mater standing up to the left for once. When I was on campus, events featuring even marginally conservative speakers were often shut down due to protest and general liberal outrage.

Apparently Charlie Hustle wasn't a very good gambler. The Sports Economist provides a link to a break down of Pete Rose's bets.

Last but not least, California Golden Blogs has a mini-breakdown of some of the differences in academic standards between Cal and UCLA.

That should keep y'all busy for a while. A quick shout out to the Golden Bears Men's Baseball team, currently 23-9, and ranked 8th in this weeks Baseball America poll.

Just a Little Off the Top 04/03/2008

Don't have much to say today, so a few links for your entertainment:

The inimitable Big Daddy Drew made me laugh today, with his metaphorical take on Davidson's recent March Madness adventures.

Slate has an entertaining story about the all-consuming nature of fantasy baseball. I still haven't told the girlfriend I'm actually in two leagues this year instead of one. Shh!

Speaking of, Sam Walker's Fantasyland is a fun fantasy baseball read (talk about phrases you never thought you'd hear). I mean, it's no Moneyball, but Amazon is selling the hardcover for seven bucks for some reason, so you can't go wrong.

I think that just about catches us up. I'm trying to arrange another guest post, and might have lined up a full time contributor to the site, so there's a pretty decent chance y'all will get a break from my frequent complaining about the Giants misadventures in the N.L. West.

Until I have something interesting to say...

Bill James Gets Around

Apparently, running the Boston Red Sox isn't enough of a challenge for Bill James (there's some baseless invective straight out of my mother's Albuquerque basement for you). Here in Slate, he's figured out when a basketball game is actually over. Since, you know, I guess it's not over when the clock says 00:00. Or something.

The formula:

Number of points team is ahead
- 3
+ .5 points if leading team has the ball or - .5 if trailing team has the ball (negative numbers become zero)
Square the result

If the resulting number is greater than the number of seconds left in the game, the lead is safe.

Ah, screw it - there's a widget embedded in the Slate article.

Don't mind me - I'm having a hard time caring about basketball after Cal's sorry excuse for a season (funny, I feel like I said something very similar during the bowl games). Besides, this will come in handy when I start placing my foolish, under-informed wagers on the games. And not to mention my brackets. Oh, Lord, my brackets.

Thanks, Mom & Dad

Just when I was about ready to take responsibility for my own misery, Edinburgh University researchers have determined that happiness is in our genes. Take it away, Dr Alexander Weiss:

Although happiness is subject to a wide range of external influences, we have found that there is a heritable component of happiness.

So not only can we not determine the legitimacy of other people's brain states, apparently now we're only somewhat responsible for our own general dispositions. Studying 1000 sets of twins, the researchers were able to determine that basic happiness is about fifty percent genetic, with the rest being accounted for by external factors such as health, wealth, and relationships (and, presumably, big-screen HDTVs).

Then again, what do the Scots know? They deep fry pizza:




(Link to the study found on the always interesting Freakonomics blog.)

PS. Just kidding, mom & dad. Y'all are the best.