Just up at dadlabs.com is a book review by my very own bad self. The book under review is Alternadad, a memoir of dad-dom by Neal Pollack. I wrote about Pollack a few weeks ago, when my book review was merely a potentiality, but now I can, and in fact do, speak with much greater authority on the subject:
Neal Pollack’s Alternadad is nominally a memoir about trying to stay indie while growing into the responsibilities of fatherhood. Or as the New York Post puts it, Alternadad is “the first father’s eye view in the growing subgenre of books by hip moms trying to parent without shedding the ethos of underground culture.”
I say the book is nominally those things because …When he’s doing armchair sociology, or contemplating the art of being an “alternadad,” Pollack is unconvincing. When he’s earnest, which he is for the much larger chunk of the book, Pollack is a lot like Garrison Keillor—funny, humane, self-deprecating—with fresher pop cultural references and a vastly greater affection for pot-smoking.
I wasn’t asked to grade the book — with stars, or avocadoes (sp?), or thumbs — but I suppose if I had to I’d give it a B/B+ (I don’t know what translates to in avocadoes). It’s fun to read, and I like Pollack’s voice a lot, but it also feels a bit too much like it was on its way to being really good but the exigencies of life got in the way and Pollack had to hand in the manuscript while it was still only partially baked.
To give you a sense of what I mean about it partial bak-ed-ness, consider a recent post on Pollack’s website. In it, Pollack responds to a recent David Brooks’ op-ed in the Times that describes Alternadad as "indescribably dull" and uses the book as a particularly irritating example of "the hipster parent moment." Pollack writes:
I’m proud to be part of this generation of parents, which is trying to regain cultural control of its lives from corporate entertainment conglomerates (or at least influence certain corporate-entertainment decisions). The entrepreneurial energy has only begun to assert itself. I see parents remaking children’s fashion, yes, and children’s music, but also piling tons of energy into helping save our sagging public-education system, trying to reclaim decent childhood nutrition from a deep Cheetos-dug hole, and generally trying to assert their cultural identity in a world that denies them anything but beleagured "soccer mom" or "diaper dad" labels.
Brooks says he’s "not against the indie/alternative lifestyle." While he rightly points out that there is an especially annoying brand of indie conformity, he wouldn’t know an authentic DIY project if it started giving him a lap dance on the R5 to 30th Street Station. We’re trying to raise our children to be thinking, creative individuals, not indie automaton clones of ourselves. I don’t care if my son grows up thinking differently than me. I just care that he grows up thinking at all. He’s not a "deceptive edginess badge." He’s the great joy of my life. Together, along with the energy and enthusiasm of thousands of other parents, we’re going to change the world, or at least try.
There has to be a better way to raise a kid in this country. Brooks, in all his privilege, doesn’t get the point: This is not a consumerist movement. We "hipster parents" are middle class, and we want the same things that our middle-class parents had: A decent school for our kids, a decent house in a good neighborhood, and decent health care. The rest of it is just window dressing, though, admittedly, it’s fun window dressing.
First, let it be said that the David Brooks op-ed truly is noxious, and seems written far more out of resentment than out of perception. Let it also be said, however, that Pollack’s response is mildly confused. Is the important point that his generation of parents is struggling "to regain cultural control of its lives from corporate entertainment conglomerates," or is "cultural control" merely "window dressing," as he suggests only two paragraphs later, around the far more important task of raising our children well?
It’s the same confusion that troubles his book. Is the important thing that he and his wife are trying to expose Elijah to non-mainstream culture, or is the important thing that they’re struggling to put their son’s interests above their own? Or is there some way in which the two projects come together around building an entire alternative community together in which raising children well will be easier and more fulfilling for everyone? From reading the book, and reading the website, I simply don’t know what answer Pollack is trying to give.
As to what any of this has to do with masculinity, I’m open to suggestions. Mostly, though, I just thought y’all might be interested in my book review.
