Malcolm Gladwell, Talking to Strangers. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2019. 386 pages.
This is the latest book by the New York Times best-selling author Malcolm Gladwell. I have read all of Gladwell’s books. He is well known for being an interesting, thought-provoking writer. His books Tipping Point, Outliers, and Blink all take a fresh look at things people experience regularly. This book is similar.
Gladwell tells the story of Sandra Bland, a young, African American woman who was pulled over by a police officer while she was driving in rural Texas. What should have been a routine stop escalated until Bland was eventually arrested and imprisoned. Three days later, she committed suicide. Gladwell wrote this book to explain what happened. He argues that we are not good at talking with strangers, and needless conflicts occur as a result.
Gladwell raises the question, “Puzzle Number One: Why can’t we tell when the stranger in front of us is lying to our face?” (27). Gladwell cites several historic examples, such as Cortez meeting with Montezuma II and the time Cuban spies infiltrated the US intelligence system without being detected for years. Gladwell also cites the famous encounter between Neville Chamberlain and Adolph Hitler. Chamberlain mistakenly assumed that if he met with Hitler personally, he could reason with him. Chamberlain later explained, “In short I had established a certain confidence which was my aim, and on my side in spite of the hardness and ruthlessness I thought I saw in his face I got the impression that he was a man who could be relied upon when he had given his word” (31). Gladwell notes that “The people who were right about Hitler were those who knew the least about him personally” (36). Gladwell’s point is that people mistakenly assume they can understand people if they meet them face to face. But we mistake physical clues and miss important signs.
Gladwell relates the story of Sendhil Mullainathan who examined 554,689 defendants who stood before a judge requesting parole. Judges typically assume that, as they interview a defendant, they can tell if the person is remorseful, humble, or defiant, and they can determine if the defendant is likely to commit another crime while awaiting trial. Mullainathan then developed a program that looked at nothing but the defendant’s age and criminal record in order to predict if the person would commit another crime. The program’s predictions were 25% more accurate than those of the judges’ who met the defendants in person (39). Gladwell’s point is that even seasoned professionals fail to get a good read on people.
Gladwell lists a second question: “Puzzle Number Two: How is it that meeting a stranger can sometimes make us worse at making sense of that person than not meeting them?” (43). Gladwell goes on to state, “If I can convince you of one thing in this book, let it be this: Strangers are not easy” (50). Gladwell cites the case of the “Queen of Cuba,” Ana Montes, who was one of the most devastating spies in American history (53). Several American intelligence analysts suspected her. In hindsight, there were obvious signs that something was wrong. But she wasn’t caught for an extended period of time. Gladwell explains, “The issue with spies is not that there is something brilliant about them. It is that there is something wrong with us.” (68).
Gladwell claims that we have a “default to truth” (73). He explains, “We start by believing. And we stop believing only when our doubts and misgivings rise to the point where we can no longer explain them away” (74). He adds, “Belief is not the absence of doubt. You believe someone because you don’t have enough doubts about them” (78).
Gladwell cites the example of Bernie Madoff (89). Numerous people had suspicions about him. But when they talked to him, he always alleviated their worries. Gladwell also goes into a lengthy study of Jerry Sandusky who sexually abused numerous boys. Again, many people suspected him, but everyone defaulted to truth rather than believing the incriminating facts that stared them in the face.
Gladwell presents an interesting discussion of FACS, which stands for Facial Action Coding System (147). There are 43 distinct muscle movements in the face that each have a corresponding number. The scientific study of facial expressions presumes certain expressions reveal happiness, others anger, etc. But Gladwell notes that some people do not follow the norm. When studying such people’s facial expressions, they fool people by not looking like one would expect. Gladwell notes examples such as Amanda Knox, an American exchange student who was falsely convicted of murdering her roommate in Italy despite a lack of any hard evidence (168). Gladwell demonstrates that even police officials who are trained to notice facial clues can get it completely wrong when people do not act in predictable ways.
Gladwell also discusses a fraternity party during which a woman was allegedly raped after she and her assailant became extremely inebriated (187). Gladwell notes that the traditional view of alcohol is that it removes inhibitions and exposes people for who they really are. But he presents the Myopia theory of alcohol, which purports that its “principle effect is to narrow our emotional and mental fields of vision” (207). It “puts us at the mercy of our environment” (210). This theory asserts that alcohol removes the long-term perspective on our actions, making our current situation seem to be all that matters. He concludes, “Alcohol isn’t an agent of revelation. It’s an agent of transformation” (210). Again, many college campuses have strict rules about sexual consent and abuse, yet they have no rules regulating alcohol consumption, even though it impairs judgment in situations where women are vulnerable.
Gladwell also discusses the case of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind 9/11 (235). Gladwell examines the interrogation approach that uses waterboarding and sleep deprivation. He shows that sleep deprivation causes people to distort their awareness and memory so that their testimony or confession becomes increasingly suspect.
Gladwell also looks at the concept of “coupling” (265). He suggests that we typically act in response to a certain place or event. He uses the example of Sylvia Plath’s suicide. She committed suicide using a gas oven. We tend to assume that had a gas oven not been available, she would have used a gun, knife, or noose. But that conjecture is not necessarily true. The Golden Gate Bridge has been the scene of more suicides than any other place in North America (277). For years, it was assumed that there was no point in erecting guardrails to hinder suicides, because suicidal people would just find another way to end their life. But this assumption is likely false.
Gladwell then studies a situation in Kansas City where the police force attempted to reduce crime. They made numerous changes, such as increasing police patrols in certain neighborhoods, but those initiatives were ineffective. They ultimately discovered that crime was limited to just a handful of streets in the city. By aggressively patrolling those streets and searching for concealed weapons, the crime rate dropped dramatically (297).
Gladwell then returns to the case of Sandra Bland. The police officer was trained in the new technique of policing that involves finding any reason to stop a motorist and then looking for any sign of trouble. The problem was that the policeman was patrolling a rural area that had no noticeable crime. He used the wrong approach in the wrong place, which led to an innocent woman’s death. Gladwell concludes, “The death of Sandra Bland is what happens when a society does not know how to talk to strangers” (342).
Gladwell’s books are always interesting. He tackles issues I had not previously considered. I did not enjoy this book as much as some of his others. I’m not entirely sure why. He tells a number of extended stories that seem to drag on too long. He also uses a lot of direct quotes that include a significant amount of profanity and sexual content. While some of the studies and examples he cites are interesting, he seems to be offering a mountain of evidence to explain a tragic incident on a Texas roadside.
Nevertheless, I typically purchase and read all of Gladwell’s books, and I am not disappointed I read this one. It sheds light on the phenomenon of understanding strangers, whether someone you meet on an airplane or a customer you serve. It teaches us to be humbler and more careful in our dealings with strangers. It teaches us to avoid making too many assumptions. It addresses a number of sobering realities and true stories. But it also makes the reader think, which is Gladwell’s specialty.
Rating: 3
