This is a hard book to rate. It documents how segments of America lost their minds-on the left and right-between the euphoria of Obama’s election and the rise of Trump and and how that played out across significant events and in the media, etc. Williams does this from a unique perspective; both inside and outside in important ways when it comes to race, class, culture, etc. It is an important reminder that we are in danger of losing of our classical liberal values thanks to extremism by both sides that seem to strengthen and reinforce each other.

But it doesn’t really have a thesis or conclusion. It doesn’t really come together to offer insights or conclusions. It has the feel of collected essays that all ask the reader not to forget these events and ideas or let them be memory holed. It argues for certain values and approaches but doesn’t really tie things together. It is interesting, and provocative to argue that the riots and unrest in response to the murder of George Floyd are connected to the events of January 6, for example, but it isn't flushed out or developed in a serious way. I am very much open to this sort of both side-ism and think it is largely correct, but I am not sure who the audience is for this perspective. Ironically, Williams outlines why his perspective tends to get attacked from both sides which left me wondering who the book was aimed at.

An important and depressing reminder of a time many would like to forget, but felt like it could have been something more.

Thomas Chatterton Williams delivers a searing and thought-provoking collection in Summer of Our Discontent, a book that wrestles with what it means to live, speak, and think freely in a time when nuance often drowns beneath the noise. Part memoir, part philosophical meditation, part cultural autopsy, this isn’t a book that coddle, it challenges. And that’s the point. Williams threads personal reflection with sharp societal observation, exploring how certainty has replaced curiosity in both public and private discourse. From campus culture to online pile-ons to the slow erosion of intellectual bravery, Williams questions the cost of a culture allergic to ambiguity. He doesn’t frame himself as above the fray but rather as someone deeply entangled in it. There’s an elegant tension running through the book: Williams is fiercely principled, but not dogmatic. The essays invite disagreement rather than shut it down, and that open-handedness is what makes this such a vital read. Some chapters feel more grounded than others, and a few ideas could’ve benefited from deeper unpacking, but overall, the prose is razor-sharp, the tone self-aware, and the stakes feel very real.

Thank you to the publisher and NetGalley for advanced copy, and I give my review freely

Thought-provoking contemporary history of the US' post-Obama era slide into greater tribalism and illiberal echo chambers. There's an interesting connection drawn between the guilty self-awareness of the privileged remote-worker class during COVID and support of BLM and antiracism, embedded in discussion of broader trends in social media hashtag- and performative activism. Make no mistake, this book presents an argument: the selection of facts, quotes, and stories is all in support of that argument. I didn't necessarily agree with the author's assertions or conclusions, but with few exceptions thought the argument was well-reasoned and well-articulated, and many of the connections made were both novel (to me) and persuasive.

The book is written by a U.S. Black centrist intellectual and author, who lives in France. The thesis is…well, that is the problem. The thesis is that humanism, specifically around race, overreached itself in a way that provoked a backlash. Shorthand this as wokeness run amok.

The author goes about the proof by recapitulating the years from Obama’s election to the attack on the Capitol. This is not an argument; it is a description. From the beginning chapters, strangely fixated on Ta-Nehisi Coates in what feels like an attempt to shame him, to the closing chapters, where the author gives the aborted coup an "other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?", there is no reasoning. It is someone telling you a series of major news events from then to now.

The idea, I think, is that if you explain the major ways in which the consensus view at the time was incorrect, it provides a justification for people’s anger. And this is interesting. But I think here that the conclusion is get your news from slow media. The author's own point is not proved or disproved. Cultural trends, and culture includes politics, affect what is being reported, but how do I know that this is not post hoc, propter hoc? And the point, for instance, of the marketplace of ideas and a free media in a democratic society is meant to be self-correcting. I assume the counter-argument is that the woke are uniquely censorious, yet we are having this conversation, so surely that cannot be the end.

It is polemic, and much of what I thrilled about here is the function of the polemic. I envy the author’s mastery of the sneering aside, and the non-argument is unassailable, making it perfect: since there is no argument, only the implication of one, all that is there to argue with is the facts. It looks strong, since facts are facts, but facts are not evidence. They are what evidence is made of. And neither is a result.

I am particularly irritated here in that there is a sort of grand architecture offered in the opening chapter arguing for a return to an idea of Americanism. Cynically though it seems present only to afford something to point at as a thesis, or at least is a one-off comment, and only returned to through implication. You can read where the argument might have been made at some point, though it is not.

My thanks to the author, Thomas Chatterton Williams, for writing the book, and to the publisher, Knopf, Pantheon, Vintage, and Anchor, for making the ARC available to me.

This book is described as “controversial” and “provocative,” and it could probably offend people of any political leaning. However, I think people of every political leaning will get something worthwhile out of it, even if they disagree with some points. I am rating this book based on the credibility and quality of its writing, not whether I agree with the author on every single one of his opinions, because that’s how I think reviewing a book should work.

To distill the book down to two main ideas, it advocates for
1. free speech (albeit not without consequences if you misuse this right) and sincere discussions
2. viewing people according “the content of their character” rather than the “color of their skin,” as Dr. King would say.
I would hope those are not all that controversial, yet apparently they are. That is why it is all the more important that Williams writes the way he does: with thoughtfulness and thoroughness. He discusses difficult topics with sensitivity and acknowledges their complexity. His
claims are backed up by abundant citations.

As indicated by the excellent title, this book is essentially a response to what transpired in the summer of 2020 and how America (and the world) reacted. It is ultimately about what it means to be American and what it means to be human.

This was close to being a five-star read for me. I would have liked it even better if it had felt a bit more accessible for all, and if it had had a bit more hope in terms of clear ideas for how to make things better. The ending felt abrupt and bleak (which, honestly, makes sense given the content and the title, but still).

I recommend this book to anyone concerned about the state of thought and speech in America today.

Thank you to NetGalley and Knopf, Pantheon, Vintage, and Anchor for the free eARC. I post this review with my honest opinions. This review is cross-posted on Goodreads and will be posted on Amazon and Instagram within one week of the book’s publication date.