Summary

The article defends self-help literature against recent criticisms, arguing that it offers valuable tools for individual development despite some authors' oversight of social issues.

Abstract

The article "Self-help Literature Doesn’t Deserve a Bad Rap" counters the current backlash against self-help books by emphasizing their role in fostering personal growth and resilience. It acknowledges the genre's Western roots and its focus on individualism, which empowers people to take responsibility for their lives and overcome adversity through self-discipline and self-awareness. The author, from an Indian perspective, does not view self-help solely through the lens of America's cultural wars but recognizes its universal application. While conceding that self-help sometimes neglects broader social realities, the article maintains that the core purpose of these books is to enable individuals to harness their inner resources to thrive despite societal injustices. It also distinguishes self-help as a specialized field, similar to medical specializations, which should not be criticized for not addressing every aspect of human life.

Opinions

The author believes that self-help literature is unfairly criticized and that its core principles of individual effort and self-improvement are still relevant and beneficial.
It is suggested that the current social turmoil in the U.S. has led to an unfair demonization of self-help, labeling it as a genre monopolized by white privilege and ignorant of social injustice.
The article posits that self-help is a distinctively Western concept centered on the individual's potential and responsibility, contrasting it with collectivist Asian cultural views.
The author agrees that self-help literature may oversimplify complex social issues by promoting the idea that individuals can overcome any obstacle through personal effort alone.
It is argued that self-help books provide new insights and perspectives on self-development when read with an open mind, despite the possibility of rehashing common advice.
The article concludes that not all self-help authors are privileged or disingenuous, and the genre should not be dismissed because of a few bad actors.
Self-help is defended as a legitimate field that aims to equip individuals with strategies for self-improvement, regardless of societal flaws.

Self-help Literature Doesn’t Deserve a Bad Rap

A Few snake-oil salesmen don’t make the genre bad

These are dreadful days for the self-help literature. Many people have been going after it with a vicious vengeance.

I suspect the ongoing social turmoil in the U.S. has a lot to do with the demonizing of self-help. It is a victim of America’s cultural wars.

Suddenly people have discovered something that they missed earlier- Self-help is monopolized by white privileged people. According to the social justice warriors, self-help peddles false utopias after ignoring rampant social injustice.

I am an Indian living in India. I don’t have firsthand experienced American life, although I am aware of America’s racial problem and its roots.

So I don’t want to judge self-help only through the prism of America’s cultural wars. I look at self-help as an independent discipline no matter whether the authors are white, black or brown.

Self-help is a distinctively Western concept. Self-help is about the self, about how the individuals can help themselves on their own.

In collectivist Asian cultures, even in democracies like India, Japan and South Korea, the self is viewed as part of the expanded social unit which may be a community or a nation. People can help themselves, but only by co-opting the society.

In the West, secular humanism and democracy have propagated the cult of individualism. The individual has immense potential, no matter in which environment they live. If people fail or suffer it is their own fault. They failed because they couldn’t take responsibility for their lives. They did not do all they can to actualize their talents and abilities. They failed to become who they could be because they lacked self-awareness and self-discipline.

Therefore, much of self-help literature focuses on how individuals can overcome challenges and constraints through their own efforts. Viktor Frankl survived the Holocaust because, he had the resilience to overcome adversity. He found meaning and purpose in suffering.

I concede there is some merit in the criticism that self-help ignored social realities and proffered magic bullet solutions that individuals can adopt to overcome crises and flourish irrespective of the societies in which they lived.

People who succeeded in their lives despite facing severe handicaps like poverty and disabilities were exceptional individuals. Self-help cites these examples to show how human potential, if harnessed and actualized, can achieve extraordinary results.

The question is can everybody replicate these success stories in their lives? Can everybody overcome crippling limitations and barriers like poverty and social discrimination? Millions perished in Hitler’s concentration camps. Only a few like for example Viktor Frankl survived and flourished.

Self-help as the name itself suggests is about self-assistance and self-renewal through individual efforts. This neglect of social realities may be a flaw, but you don’t criticize a heart surgeon for ignoring how the body functions as a complex whole when she ignores heart complications that are rooted in other physiological and emotional problems. Medical schools trained her to look upon the body as a sum of individual parts and not as a complex whole of interdependent parts.

The aim of self-help literature is to help individuals to marshall their internal resources like grit, resilience, attention, compassion, acceptance, etc. to defy life’s unfairness and uncertainty. The point is to flourish despite social injustice.

Self-help does not attempt to change the society because it is individual- centric. Self-help authors are aware of what is happening in society. Radical overhaul of society is not on their agenda.

That many people have transcended suffering caused by societal imbalances shows how humans can overcome unfavourable circumstances by harnessing the indomitable human will.

I am a big fan of self-help books even if they rehash the same truisms and formulae like getting up at 5 a.m, writing a journal, meditation, mindfulness, forgiveness, compassion and acceptance.

You never leave a self-help book without learning a new insight or perspective about self-development. The only condition is you should read with an open mind.

Conclusion

The demonization of self-help literature misses the woods for the trees. Not every self-help author is a millionaire who speaks from a vantage point of unearned privilege. There may be peddlers of snake-oil solutions, but they do not define the self-help genre.

The self-help authors intend to help individuals help themselves.The readers can choose whether they should apply the authors’ strategies and tools for self-development. Humans are unique individuals. What works for some many not work for others?

But that cannot be the reason to accuse self-help writers of elitist social blindness.

Thanks for reading.