BOO KS
481
piece of research, suggest your knowledge by name-dropping and spuri–
ous identification: "political sociologist Paul Lazarsfeld of Columbia
University says," "sociologist Milton Gordonn, now of Wellesley Col–
lege," etc. When you lack standards of significance, you can at least
borrow the prestige of institutional affiliation to enhance your air of
authority.
2) Homogenization of Facts:
If
a sense of qualitative discrimina–
tion is lacking, the quantity of facts must make do. Hence the reader's
resistance must be overwhelmed by bringing to bear on him an avalanche
of ill-assorted and homogenized facts. In such a procedure the trivial
becomes important and the important trivial: "In a study of a group of
call girls, it was found that the pimp, far from being a harsh exploiter,
typically functions as a status symbol," or "Children often find living
with a rapidly upward-mobile couple a strain. They tend to feel isolated
and insecure; and may compensate by becoming chronic talkers." This
reads like an unwitting parody of the less happy products of modern
sociology.
3) Fake Precision:
Real knowledge can be simulated by glvmg
precise, though really irrelevant, information: "I talked with a Venetian
gondolier who obviously was very pleased with his $1,050 gondola."
4) Stimulus and R eward:
Frighten the jaded reader, arouse his
guilt and anxiety, but at the climax soothe and reassure him. Talk of
"the hidden barriers that affect you, your community, your future," or
"an upheaval in the American way of life," of "disquieting changes,"
assure him that "all in all, we are in the process of becoming a many–
layered society....
If
the frustration mounts ... we may well get a
movement for the nationalization of industry." But then, having raised
these specters, suggest that there is nothing really wrong with American
society that cannot be cured by a change in our attitudes; it's all in the
mind: "I think we should all be happier, and live more stimulating lives,
if ... we judge people not by the symbols they display and the labels
they wear but rather by their individual worth." And after you have
aroused anxious concern about the display of status symbols, end by
saying: "Status distinctions would appear to be inevitable in a society
as complicated as ours. The problem is not to try to wipe them out–
which would be impossible-but to achieve a reasonably happy society
within their framework ... much can be done to promote contentment,
mutual respect, and life satisfaction."
Packard's formula is perhaps best exemplified by his technique of
enumerating in a chapter the horror of a particular aspect of status–
striving and then ending with a homily designed to endear the author
to the apprehensive reader. The ladies can safely read about residential
