What do you think?
Rate this book
The Pentagon of Power
In this concluding volume of The Myth of the Machine, Mumford brings to a head his radical revisions of the stale popular conceptions of human and technological progress. Far from being an attack on science and technics, The Pentagon of Power seeks to establish a more organic social order based on technological resources. Index; photographs.
496 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1970
About the author
Lewis Mumford
126 books280 followersLewis Mumford (October 19, 1895 – January 26, 1990) was an American historian and philosopher of technology and science. Particularly noted for his study of cities and urban architecture, he had a tremendously broad career as a writer that also included a period as an influential literary critic. Mumford was influenced by the work of Scottish theorist Sir Patrick Geddes.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
January 21, 2008
The work of Lewis Mumford is incredible. This book is part two of a series, but I much prefer this one. He lays out some concepts that were formative for me and altered and/or greatly refined my outlook on life. His concept of megatechnics and the megamachine is astute. His view is well-rounded, if not a little dated, given his age at the time he was writing. But I have found in few other places such an exhaustive conceptual framework for what is happening in our world vis-a-vis technology. This is one of the trilogy of books I read on this subject that altered my worldview, including 2 books by Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society and Propaganda (see reviews). These books caused me to really question the role of technology in our society and to think about the complex part it plays in forming our outlook on life. Furthermore, this is almost entirely ignored by most people, which is absurd.
This was also a case where I was searching for confirmation of a key concept that had occurred to me. This was the notion that the introduction of paper money and credit changed the nature of both money and capitalism. I think this is an under appreciated fact that has had far-reaching effects on our way of life.
Mumford points out the totalitarian nature of much of our technology and explodes (along with Ellul) the notion that technology is neutral in our lives. I truly believe it is not neutral and that this is one of the biggest fallacies of the last century, as well as this one. These totalitarian edifices in our social structure are quite significant and are to be ignored only at our peril. He proposes a better model, which is always good. This is one of those books, along with Ellul's that set one apart from others even more because it moves one outside of the normal framework within which most operate. It makes it hard to even talk to others without a preceding lengthy lecture on the basic concepts. This is because Mumford deconstructs many common myths and misconceptions and redefines the terms used regarding technics and technology. This is why he is brilliant.
This was also a case where I was searching for confirmation of a key concept that had occurred to me. This was the notion that the introduction of paper money and credit changed the nature of both money and capitalism. I think this is an under appreciated fact that has had far-reaching effects on our way of life.
Mumford points out the totalitarian nature of much of our technology and explodes (along with Ellul) the notion that technology is neutral in our lives. I truly believe it is not neutral and that this is one of the biggest fallacies of the last century, as well as this one. These totalitarian edifices in our social structure are quite significant and are to be ignored only at our peril. He proposes a better model, which is always good. This is one of those books, along with Ellul's that set one apart from others even more because it moves one outside of the normal framework within which most operate. It makes it hard to even talk to others without a preceding lengthy lecture on the basic concepts. This is because Mumford deconstructs many common myths and misconceptions and redefines the terms used regarding technics and technology. This is why he is brilliant.
October 29, 2015
This second volume to Lewis Mumford's 2 volume set "The Myth of the Machine" is incredible. It picks up where the 1st volume left off and shuttles us all the way up to the late 60's early 70's. Along the way Lewis Mumford brilliantly deconstructs the motives behind the advancement of technology as well as some of the more sinister and seedier hidden aspects of the society within the machine's psyche.
Modern man's longing for space travel is actually turned upside down in this book and evaluated with such a witty biting realistic cynicism that completely deprograms everything we have been thought. Oh, you thought that the space age was ushered in because of man's inexhaustible mind that causes him to look to the stars in order to find his place in the universe and in doing so constantly explores the unknown? WRONG. The space age exploded on the scene due to the political pissing contest between two different MEGAMACHINES (MOTHER RUSSIA, and the GOOD OLE U S OF A). Of course we already knew this but what makes this book incredible is the way Lewis Mumford compares and contrasts the Ancient Egyptian (Khemet) MEGAMACHINE's pyramid building (pissing contest between kings and pharaoh's) and the space race (pissing contest that went down between Russian leaders and U.S leaders).
Along the way this awesome book (that I wish had been required reading in highschool, although if it had been I don't think I would have read it) takes us all the way from Medieval times to the present day. I don't think I have quoted another book more than this one on GoodReads, and that alone should be proof enough of how highly I esteem this book.
Modern man's longing for space travel is actually turned upside down in this book and evaluated with such a witty biting realistic cynicism that completely deprograms everything we have been thought. Oh, you thought that the space age was ushered in because of man's inexhaustible mind that causes him to look to the stars in order to find his place in the universe and in doing so constantly explores the unknown? WRONG. The space age exploded on the scene due to the political pissing contest between two different MEGAMACHINES (MOTHER RUSSIA, and the GOOD OLE U S OF A). Of course we already knew this but what makes this book incredible is the way Lewis Mumford compares and contrasts the Ancient Egyptian (Khemet) MEGAMACHINE's pyramid building (pissing contest between kings and pharaoh's) and the space race (pissing contest that went down between Russian leaders and U.S leaders).
Along the way this awesome book (that I wish had been required reading in highschool, although if it had been I don't think I would have read it) takes us all the way from Medieval times to the present day. I don't think I have quoted another book more than this one on GoodReads, and that alone should be proof enough of how highly I esteem this book.
September 19, 2017
One of the most finely argued and challenging books I've ever read. I have my points of disagreement with Mumford, occasionally in his method and occasionally in his conclusions, but the thrust of his book ultimately cannot be denied. The cult of technology is smothering mankind under a superabundance that we are physically and mentally unable to consume. The close examination of the origins and effects of this excessive fecundity entails the reevaluation of our most fundamental cultural assumptions about the unalloyed goods of technological progress and heightened industrial organization. Mumford points the way toward a better world, but even he cannot imagine the road to an organically human-centered society. In the end he is reduced to calling for a second coming of Jesus Christ, who so radically "disrupted"(to borrow a word) the Roman megamachine/power complex. But that his critique of technology is so troubling, far from being a reason to look away or ponder other things, requires us to give it precedence ahead of all other topics. To take that call seriously is radical indeed.
To read Mumford is to be in the presence of genius, a sadly neglected and discarded genius. He is neglected because of his radicalism, but radicalism in itself is not discrediting. I cannot imagine a convincing rejoinder from the camp of techno-utopians now working and writing. Highly recommended, 10/5 stars, will write fuller review later, upon greater reflection.
To read Mumford is to be in the presence of genius, a sadly neglected and discarded genius. He is neglected because of his radicalism, but radicalism in itself is not discrediting. I cannot imagine a convincing rejoinder from the camp of techno-utopians now working and writing. Highly recommended, 10/5 stars, will write fuller review later, upon greater reflection.
August 18, 2020
A challenging read, but, Mumford's The Myth of the Machine offers a long-term perspective, integrating multiple disciplines, on how the technocratic power elite have come to rule the world. While The Pentagon of Power offers a lot by itself, I recommend reading Vol. 1 (Technics and Human Development) first. Our current situation goes way beyond a single presidential election, or even a few decades of "liberal vs. conservative" politics. Much as the situation seems hopeless, Mumford does end on a positive note and encourages each of us to liberate ourselves from the megamachine. All is not lost, but only if we understand the historical perspective and only if we comprehend the vastness of the self-destructive forces we have unleashed.
January 27, 2023
Ο δεύτερος τόμος του The Myth of the Machine, δεν είχε (κατ' εμέ, πάντα, σταυρώστε με αν διαφωνείτε) τη φρεσκάδα και τη δυναμική του πρώτου, αντ' αυτού δείχνει να εξαντλείται στην παράθεση του προσωπικού του αξιακού συστήματος του συγγραφέα, χωλαίνοντας (λίγο) στην ανάλυση και (ΠΟΛΥ) στις προεκτάσεις στο μέλλον.
Δεν μπορεί κανείς να του χρεώσει ότι δεν προέβλεψε την ανάδυση των AI τη δεκαετία του 1960, όταν έβλεπε τον "κομπιούτερ" σαν ένα απλοϊκό και ηλίθιο μηχάνημα, το οποίο έπρεπε ένας άνθρωπος να το τροφοδοτεί με στοιχεία και να κάνει χειροκίνητα τις ρυθμίσεις για την παραγωγή του εκάστοτε επιθυμητού (και πάντα σχετικά απλού) αποτελέσματος. Ανθρώπινο. Από την άλλη, ένα βιβλίο κρίνεται εν μέρει στο αναφορικό πλαίσιο της εποχής του (συνήθως αν είναι μυθιστόρημα) και εν μέρει διαχρονικά (συνήθως για προιόντα στοχασμού / φιλοσοφικής σκέψης).
Χωρίς να στρείται καλών σημείων (δίνει μερικές χαριτωμένες κλωτσιές στα οπίσθια π.χ. του Ντεκάρτ και μερικών ακόμη ιερώνε τεράτωνε της δυτικής επιστήμης και φιλοσοφίας από την αναγέννηση και μετά), δυστυχώς καταλήγει συνήθως να "κάνει γύρους κολλημένος στη λάσπη" των προσωπικών του ιδεοληψιών (όχι ότι κάποιες από αυτές δεν έχουν ενδιαφέρον, ή ακόμα και στιβαρό έρεισμα) τις οποίες προσπαθεί να τεκμηριώσει/δικαιολογήσει με μέσα που συχνά αγγίζουν την επίκληση στο συναίσθημα ή μια παρα-βιωματική λογική που (ΑΠΟΨΗ ΜΟΥ, ΝΑΙ;) δεν έχει θέση σε κείμενα αυτής της κατηγορίας.
Το χειρότερο απ' όλα είναι ίσως η νεο-λουδίτικη λογική που διαποτίζει το έργο. Παρά την πονηρή αποποίηση των πρώιμων και αφελών Ρουσσεϊκών παραδείσων ευγενών αγρίων, ο Mumford αποτυγχάνει να κρύψει την σχεδόν εμμονική του άρνηση στα όρια αναφυλαξίας για την επιτάχυνση της προόδου (κυρίως τεχνολογικής) κάποιες φορές και με τη δικαιολογία της "δυσχέρειας στην εξεικείωση" του ανθρώπου με τις νέες τεχνικές όσο αυξάνεται η ταχύτητα εφμάνισης νέων.
Συμπερασματικά και αναφερόμενος και στα δύο βιβλία μαζί καθώς αποτελούν λίγο πολύ ενιαίο βιβλίο, θα πω ότι πρόκειται για ένα ενδιαφέρον μεν, συχνά αυτοακυρούμενο δε έργο, που από ένα σημείο και μετά διαγράφει ατελέσφορους κύκλους. Παρεμπιπτόντως, όποιος καταλάβει το κεφάλαιο με το Δαρβίνο σε τι ακριβώς εξυπηρετεί με την παρουσία του μέσα στο βιβλίο, ας μου εξηγήσει κι εμένα, θα το εκτιμούσα τα μάλα. Η σύλληψη, ναι, έχει ζουμί, αλλά ο τρόπος που πραγματεύεται το ζήτημα ο Mumford και τα μέσα για την εξαγωγή των συμπερασμάτων του, υπολείπονται κατά πολύ της ποιότητας της αρχικής ιδέας, ενώ στις πορβλέψεις του έχει πέσει συχνά τόσο έξω και τόσο σύντομα που ο αναγνώστης δακρύζει από... λύπη για το συγγραφέα. Ενδιαφέρον πάντως, και οφείλουμε να το αναγνωρίσουμε σε κάποιον που έγραφε στο αποκορύφωμα της πόλωσης του ψυχρού πολέμου, είναι ότι αναγνωρίσει τις δομές της μεγαμηχανής και δτα δύο υφιστάμενα τότε πολιτικοποικονομικά συστήματα τα οποία και υπορρήτως καταδικάζει. Ωστόσο, μέσα από το πρίσμα της τρέχουσας πραγματικότητας του πρώτου τετάρου τυο 21ου αιώνα, είναι σαν... να δίνεις παράσημο σε νεκρό...
Δε μετανιώνω για την ανάγνωση, αν αποφασίσετε να του δώσετε μια ευκαιρία, εστιάστε περισσότερο στον πρώτο τόμο και... αν έχετε χρόνο και νεφρά, προχωρήστε στον σαφώς πιο απογοητευτικό δεύτερο.
Δεν μπορεί κανείς να του χρεώσει ότι δεν προέβλεψε την ανάδυση των AI τη δεκαετία του 1960, όταν έβλεπε τον "κομπιούτερ" σαν ένα απλοϊκό και ηλίθιο μηχάνημα, το οποίο έπρεπε ένας άνθρωπος να το τροφοδοτεί με στοιχεία και να κάνει χειροκίνητα τις ρυθμίσεις για την παραγωγή του εκάστοτε επιθυμητού (και πάντα σχετικά απλού) αποτελέσματος. Ανθρώπινο. Από την άλλη, ένα βιβλίο κρίνεται εν μέρει στο αναφορικό πλαίσιο της εποχής του (συνήθως αν είναι μυθιστόρημα) και εν μέρει διαχρονικά (συνήθως για προιόντα στοχασμού / φιλοσοφικής σκέψης).
Χωρίς να στρείται καλών σημείων (δίνει μερικές χαριτωμένες κλωτσιές στα οπίσθια π.χ. του Ντεκάρτ και μερικών ακόμη ιερώνε τεράτωνε της δυτικής επιστήμης και φιλοσοφίας από την αναγέννηση και μετά), δυστυχώς καταλήγει συνήθως να "κάνει γύρους κολλημένος στη λάσπη" των προσωπικών του ιδεοληψιών (όχι ότι κάποιες από αυτές δεν έχουν ενδιαφέρον, ή ακόμα και στιβαρό έρεισμα) τις οποίες προσπαθεί να τεκμηριώσει/δικαιολογήσει με μέσα που συχνά αγγίζουν την επίκληση στο συναίσθημα ή μια παρα-βιωματική λογική που (ΑΠΟΨΗ ΜΟΥ, ΝΑΙ;) δεν έχει θέση σε κείμενα αυτής της κατηγορίας.
Το χειρότερο απ' όλα είναι ίσως η νεο-λουδίτικη λογική που διαποτίζει το έργο. Παρά την πονηρή αποποίηση των πρώιμων και αφελών Ρουσσεϊκών παραδείσων ευγενών αγρίων, ο Mumford αποτυγχάνει να κρύψει την σχεδόν εμμονική του άρνηση στα όρια αναφυλαξίας για την επιτάχυνση της προόδου (κυρίως τεχνολογικής) κάποιες φορές και με τη δικαιολογία της "δυσχέρειας στην εξεικείωση" του ανθρώπου με τις νέες τεχνικές όσο αυξάνεται η ταχύτητα εφμάνισης νέων.
Συμπερασματικά και αναφερόμενος και στα δύο βιβλία μαζί καθώς αποτελούν λίγο πολύ ενιαίο βιβλίο, θα πω ότι πρόκειται για ένα ενδιαφέρον μεν, συχνά αυτοακυρούμενο δε έργο, που από ένα σημείο και μετά διαγράφει ατελέσφορους κύκλους. Παρεμπιπτόντως, όποιος καταλάβει το κεφάλαιο με το Δαρβίνο σε τι ακριβώς εξυπηρετεί με την παρουσία του μέσα στο βιβλίο, ας μου εξηγήσει κι εμένα, θα το εκτιμούσα τα μάλα. Η σύλληψη, ναι, έχει ζουμί, αλλά ο τρόπος που πραγματεύεται το ζήτημα ο Mumford και τα μέσα για την εξαγωγή των συμπερασμάτων του, υπολείπονται κατά πολύ της ποιότητας της αρχικής ιδέας, ενώ στις πορβλέψεις του έχει πέσει συχνά τόσο έξω και τόσο σύντομα που ο αναγνώστης δακρύζει από... λύπη για το συγγραφέα. Ενδιαφέρον πάντως, και οφείλουμε να το αναγνωρίσουμε σε κάποιον που έγραφε στο αποκορύφωμα της πόλωσης του ψυχρού πολέμου, είναι ότι αναγνωρίσει τις δομές της μεγαμηχανής και δτα δύο υφιστάμενα τότε πολιτικοποικονομικά συστήματα τα οποία και υπορρήτως καταδικάζει. Ωστόσο, μέσα από το πρίσμα της τρέχουσας πραγματικότητας του πρώτου τετάρου τυο 21ου αιώνα, είναι σαν... να δίνεις παράσημο σε νεκρό...
Δε μετανιώνω για την ανάγνωση, αν αποφασίσετε να του δώσετε μια ευκαιρία, εστιάστε περισσότερο στον πρώτο τόμο και... αν έχετε χρόνο και νεφρά, προχωρήστε στον σαφώς πιο απογοητευτικό δεύτερο.
May 19, 2017
This book is difficult to rate. The first third or so is mostly historical analysis, and he has some interesting and cogent points to make about the idea of the Dark Ages vs the Enlightenment, the gradual social and technological changes contrasted with the Industrial Revolution as an artificial watershed, and the fetishization of a modular, mechanistic world view.
Unfortunately when he turns to speculate about the future, he falls prey to the sort of thinking that ignores the fractal nature of knowledge, and is snared in the very traps he spent the first chapters describing. The latter part of the book is full of forecasts that turned out to be erroneous about social stagnation and the degeneration of the human race into lotus-eating parasitic automatons. Etsy alone belies a large portion of his fears, between its showcase of creativity and its ability to foster connections between buyers/sellers located all over the globe. (I also noticed very little mention of women as active participants in history or modern culture, a myopia that may be related to some of the other blind spots in evidence.)
So three stars is essentially an average of the good beginning with the disappointing finish. I was led to the book by a quote referenced in You Belong to the Universe: Buckminster Fuller and the Future where Mumford is criticizing Fuller's overly-mechanistic descriptions of the earth and particularly human beings - a valid criticism still, regardless of the philosophy in which it is embedded.
Unfortunately when he turns to speculate about the future, he falls prey to the sort of thinking that ignores the fractal nature of knowledge, and is snared in the very traps he spent the first chapters describing. The latter part of the book is full of forecasts that turned out to be erroneous about social stagnation and the degeneration of the human race into lotus-eating parasitic automatons. Etsy alone belies a large portion of his fears, between its showcase of creativity and its ability to foster connections between buyers/sellers located all over the globe. (I also noticed very little mention of women as active participants in history or modern culture, a myopia that may be related to some of the other blind spots in evidence.)
So three stars is essentially an average of the good beginning with the disappointing finish. I was led to the book by a quote referenced in You Belong to the Universe: Buckminster Fuller and the Future where Mumford is criticizing Fuller's overly-mechanistic descriptions of the earth and particularly human beings - a valid criticism still, regardless of the philosophy in which it is embedded.
June 9, 2010
In the second part of Lewis Mumford's "Myth of the Machine", he sets out to explore the consequences of the rise of the new sun god science and give an alternative to what he calls the new megamachine - the new organum.
The book starts with Mumford tracing the mechanized world picture present in our society (according to him) back in history to such famous minds as Galileo and Descartes. He explains how these people started a movement that would once lead - without their knowledge - to the creation of a new megamachine and the submission of humanity to science.
This book is Mumford at his best, delving deep into historic sources and analyzing the products of writers' imagination as well as scientific insight in and on the history of human development.
This book couldn't be less outdated in the times of scientists proclaiming the creation of artificial life and aiming at the creation of artificial intelligence and god-like machines - the ultimate manifestation of men's faith in the religion of science, as Mumford would say. This being the fact, I can recommend this book to everyone especially, who never questioned his own beliefs in science and technology: Mumford's alarming insights might shake your belief system - and change on the basis of insight is always a good thing.
The book starts with Mumford tracing the mechanized world picture present in our society (according to him) back in history to such famous minds as Galileo and Descartes. He explains how these people started a movement that would once lead - without their knowledge - to the creation of a new megamachine and the submission of humanity to science.
This book is Mumford at his best, delving deep into historic sources and analyzing the products of writers' imagination as well as scientific insight in and on the history of human development.
This book couldn't be less outdated in the times of scientists proclaiming the creation of artificial life and aiming at the creation of artificial intelligence and god-like machines - the ultimate manifestation of men's faith in the religion of science, as Mumford would say. This being the fact, I can recommend this book to everyone especially, who never questioned his own beliefs in science and technology: Mumford's alarming insights might shake your belief system - and change on the basis of insight is always a good thing.
June 10, 2007
supposed to be an overview of the history of technology, or "technics", except mumford focuses on ideas and beliefs basically the entire book.
he fails to grasp to any satisfactory degree the (actual) reasons behind the events he details, instead focusing almost exclusively on belief-systems as causation.
total lack of understanding of materialist cause-and-effect rationality, to a frustrating degree.
August 11, 2021
6 out of 5.
March 5, 2024
I'm really getting through all these free university books right now! I'll be honest in saying I was most excited to read this book from the pile, even though I wasn't completely sure what it would be about. All I knew was that this book sought to analyze the technical progress humans had undergone since the beginning of civilization itself. I was drawn to the deconstructive historical analysis that it offered on the subject and just knew I had to read it next. I certainly was not disappointed. Despite the time it was written, many of the arguments and warnings delivered by the author are applicable to this day. The spiritual loss that accompanies the unfulfilling work that only serves to resuscitate our mechanical world view, the utter isolation that we feel and help to implement in our public infrastructure, the academic denial of their own human subjectivity and deliberating separating ourselves from the environment which formed us, our complete derangement and psychotic behavior towards all things living to mildly convenience us- all of which only accumulates into an ultimately destructive ideology that only seeks to destroy us all. None of these things, though we increasingly see more and more people willing to stand up against complete moral degradation, have completely left our current world view. Even after 50 something years since this book was published, it's as though the mechanical view of life has never left us, though we are beginning to foresee the consequences associated with such behavior. It might not be long until a ‘planetary interchange of hydrogen bombs or scientifically contrived plagues’ brings humanity to its swift conclusion.
This all sounds very doom and gloom, and part of me was worried that the author would end it there without giving at least a suggestion to a solution or a way out. Certainly, based on the material contained in this book, I had no reason to think otherwise. Extraordinarily, though, the author provides a glimmer of hope by the end of the book. He reminds the reader that this mechanicalized form of society is one which is only created by the human psyche, that it lives and dies by us. We can choose to let it destroy us, but it can never choose to destroy us without our help, and if more of us choose to remove the shackles of machines in favor of love and mutual aid, then we’ll regain the humanity that is currently lost on us.
I already know this book will have a profound impact on my worldview. I’m already seeking ways in which I can live more genuinely and with love for my fellow man as a result. It helps that the prose is wonderfully written as well. The author keeps an academic tone but isn't afraid to be poetic and call out to the human spirit, much in line with the message of the book. My only wish for this book is a minor technical issue (and even as I type it out, it seems too silly to even mention considering the impact this book has left on me). There were many mentions of historical occurrences throughout the book that were used in the author's argument that I was excited to learn more about, but even with the bibliography at the end it was extremely hard to find out what exactly the author is referencing. Of course, I can always look into it online, but I would've been interesting to know exactly where the author had heard about it as well, considering I didn't know about some things at all (like the use of human skin as a lampshade in Nazi Germany or the policy of mass extermination of civilians from the air advocated by William Mitchell). There were also some analytic inconsistencies that I was annoyed with, like the rant against modern art and rock music. I don't necessarily disagree with his analysis, but it did seem a bit out of place with his overreaching point, especially when he concluded that these must be manifestations of the mechanical worldview in a different form. Art and music evolve as a result of the culture which forms around it, and while I definitely agree that the mechanical ideology has heavily influenced and corrupted these occupations through profit, I also don't think the type of art and music associated are themselves to blame. If anything, they started from individuals who wanted to create something new, something to invigorate the soul again, like every other piece of art or music created during various other ideologies. It seems less like a tirade against the machine and more like a tirade against very natural human responses to such a parasitic culture, which seems against what the book stands for.
I don't want to end on a bad note, though. Really, that was the only aspect of the authors analysis that I took issue with, but everything else was so acute and touched the soul in a way that's not easy for lots of academics to do. Probably because this book feels like a defense of the soul against the cold, ‘objective’ view of the world. For that alone, I commemorate this author for undertaking a task I know many academics are afraid to do. I know I will strive to make a world a less cold and uncaring place as best as I can, and I'll keep this book close to my heart as I do so.
This all sounds very doom and gloom, and part of me was worried that the author would end it there without giving at least a suggestion to a solution or a way out. Certainly, based on the material contained in this book, I had no reason to think otherwise. Extraordinarily, though, the author provides a glimmer of hope by the end of the book. He reminds the reader that this mechanicalized form of society is one which is only created by the human psyche, that it lives and dies by us. We can choose to let it destroy us, but it can never choose to destroy us without our help, and if more of us choose to remove the shackles of machines in favor of love and mutual aid, then we’ll regain the humanity that is currently lost on us.
I already know this book will have a profound impact on my worldview. I’m already seeking ways in which I can live more genuinely and with love for my fellow man as a result. It helps that the prose is wonderfully written as well. The author keeps an academic tone but isn't afraid to be poetic and call out to the human spirit, much in line with the message of the book. My only wish for this book is a minor technical issue (and even as I type it out, it seems too silly to even mention considering the impact this book has left on me). There were many mentions of historical occurrences throughout the book that were used in the author's argument that I was excited to learn more about, but even with the bibliography at the end it was extremely hard to find out what exactly the author is referencing. Of course, I can always look into it online, but I would've been interesting to know exactly where the author had heard about it as well, considering I didn't know about some things at all (like the use of human skin as a lampshade in Nazi Germany or the policy of mass extermination of civilians from the air advocated by William Mitchell). There were also some analytic inconsistencies that I was annoyed with, like the rant against modern art and rock music. I don't necessarily disagree with his analysis, but it did seem a bit out of place with his overreaching point, especially when he concluded that these must be manifestations of the mechanical worldview in a different form. Art and music evolve as a result of the culture which forms around it, and while I definitely agree that the mechanical ideology has heavily influenced and corrupted these occupations through profit, I also don't think the type of art and music associated are themselves to blame. If anything, they started from individuals who wanted to create something new, something to invigorate the soul again, like every other piece of art or music created during various other ideologies. It seems less like a tirade against the machine and more like a tirade against very natural human responses to such a parasitic culture, which seems against what the book stands for.
I don't want to end on a bad note, though. Really, that was the only aspect of the authors analysis that I took issue with, but everything else was so acute and touched the soul in a way that's not easy for lots of academics to do. Probably because this book feels like a defense of the soul against the cold, ‘objective’ view of the world. For that alone, I commemorate this author for undertaking a task I know many academics are afraid to do. I know I will strive to make a world a less cold and uncaring place as best as I can, and I'll keep this book close to my heart as I do so.
June 19, 2023
Lewis Mumford's "Pentagon of Power" is a seminal work that explores the relationship between technological advancements, social power structures, and their impact on human society. Published in 1970, this book provides a comprehensive analysis of the modern technological system and its influence on various aspects of human life, including politics, economy, and culture. In this academic review, we aim to critically engage with Mumford's arguments, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of his approach, and discuss the lasting impact of "Pentagon of Power" on the fields of technology studies and social theory.
"Pentagon of Power" examines the intricate web of power structures that emerge from the modern technological system, particularly focusing on the United States as a case study. Mumford argues that technology, far from being a neutral tool, has become a dominant force shaping human society, affecting politics, economics, urban development, and the environment.
The book is structured around several key themes. Firstly, Mumford explores the historical evolution of technology, tracing its development from early human civilizations to the modern era. He critically examines the rise of industrial capitalism and the subsequent emergence of the military-industrial complex, which he identifies as a significant source of power in contemporary society.
Secondly, Mumford delves into the impact of technology on urbanization, emphasizing the destructive consequences of rapid urban growth and the homogenization of human experience. He analyzes the role of architecture, transportation systems, and urban planning in perpetuating power imbalances and dehumanizing tendencies.
Furthermore, Mumford scrutinizes the role of technology in shaping political power structures. He examines the consolidation of power in the hands of a technological elite, the influence of technology on political decision-making processes, and the erosion of democratic values in the face of centralized control.
"Pentagon of Power" presents a comprehensive and incisive analysis of the relationship between technology, power, and human society. Mumford's work is characterized by its interdisciplinary approach, drawing from history, sociology, and urban studies to construct a nuanced understanding of the complex dynamics at play.
One of the strengths of Mumford's work lies in his critical examination of the social, cultural, and environmental consequences of technological progress. His analysis challenges the dominant narrative of technological determinism and encourages readers to critically evaluate the implications of technological advancements on human well-being and social justice.
Mumford's exploration of the military-industrial complex and its impact on society is particularly noteworthy. He sheds light on the entwined relationship between technology, militarism, and power, offering insights into the deep-seated structural issues that perpetuate inequality and exploitation.
However, it is important to critically engage with Mumford's perspective and the potential limitations of his analysis. Some readers may find his critique of technology to be overly pessimistic, potentially neglecting the positive contributions technology has made to human progress and well-being. Furthermore, Mumford's focus on the United States may limit the applicability of his analysis in a global context.
"Pentagon of Power" by Lewis Mumford remains a significant and thought-provoking contribution to the fields of technology studies and social theory. The book's comprehensive analysis, interdisciplinary approach, and critical examination of power structures offer valuable insights into the complex interplay between technology and society. While readers may have differing views on the overall impact of technology, Mumford's work invites critical reflection and fosters a deeper understanding of the social and political dimensions of technological advancements.
GPT
"Pentagon of Power" examines the intricate web of power structures that emerge from the modern technological system, particularly focusing on the United States as a case study. Mumford argues that technology, far from being a neutral tool, has become a dominant force shaping human society, affecting politics, economics, urban development, and the environment.
The book is structured around several key themes. Firstly, Mumford explores the historical evolution of technology, tracing its development from early human civilizations to the modern era. He critically examines the rise of industrial capitalism and the subsequent emergence of the military-industrial complex, which he identifies as a significant source of power in contemporary society.
Secondly, Mumford delves into the impact of technology on urbanization, emphasizing the destructive consequences of rapid urban growth and the homogenization of human experience. He analyzes the role of architecture, transportation systems, and urban planning in perpetuating power imbalances and dehumanizing tendencies.
Furthermore, Mumford scrutinizes the role of technology in shaping political power structures. He examines the consolidation of power in the hands of a technological elite, the influence of technology on political decision-making processes, and the erosion of democratic values in the face of centralized control.
"Pentagon of Power" presents a comprehensive and incisive analysis of the relationship between technology, power, and human society. Mumford's work is characterized by its interdisciplinary approach, drawing from history, sociology, and urban studies to construct a nuanced understanding of the complex dynamics at play.
One of the strengths of Mumford's work lies in his critical examination of the social, cultural, and environmental consequences of technological progress. His analysis challenges the dominant narrative of technological determinism and encourages readers to critically evaluate the implications of technological advancements on human well-being and social justice.
Mumford's exploration of the military-industrial complex and its impact on society is particularly noteworthy. He sheds light on the entwined relationship between technology, militarism, and power, offering insights into the deep-seated structural issues that perpetuate inequality and exploitation.
However, it is important to critically engage with Mumford's perspective and the potential limitations of his analysis. Some readers may find his critique of technology to be overly pessimistic, potentially neglecting the positive contributions technology has made to human progress and well-being. Furthermore, Mumford's focus on the United States may limit the applicability of his analysis in a global context.
"Pentagon of Power" by Lewis Mumford remains a significant and thought-provoking contribution to the fields of technology studies and social theory. The book's comprehensive analysis, interdisciplinary approach, and critical examination of power structures offer valuable insights into the complex interplay between technology and society. While readers may have differing views on the overall impact of technology, Mumford's work invites critical reflection and fosters a deeper understanding of the social and political dimensions of technological advancements.
GPT
December 4, 2015
This is more relevant today than when written 50 years ago. Absolutely a brilliantly written treatise that indicts the relentless quest for technology as trojan horse. The evidence has never been more clear and rather than me site that which is obvious read this incredible book for an intellectually stimulating experience that will long resonate as time well spent.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews