I'd say about one in every seven is absolutely fascinating and eye-opening. 5 in 7 are just good reading and then one in seven drags. If you're interested in the fabric that makes up amercian society, you'll love this book at much as I did. Some of the interviews are just shocking, like the UPS guy who gives better service to the companies with the best porn in the bathroom.

Also, each interview is about 5-7 pages, so if you're someone who is pressed for time, it's easy to pick up and put down quickly.

Overall, a great read.

16 of 16 found the following review helpful:


Americans defined by their work  Nov 09, 2003 By SPM "scott_maykrantz"
It's too bad it took so long for someone to put together another book like Studs Terkel's "Working." "Gig" is a collection of interviews with over 120 Americans who talk about their jobs. The questions are removed, so you end up with 3- and 4-page monologues. It's an effective technique, letting each person describe their working life in their own words.

The editors retained the references to sex and a lot of swearing, which is good. That's how people talk, so you might as well leave it in. The degree of honesty isn't reflected in the tone of the interviews, however --- the people might feel free to swear, but they don't feel free to complain about bosses, insecurity about layoffs, being stuck in dead-end jobs, bad pay, poor career choices, illegal business practices, or annoying co-workers. All of these topics get *some* coveage, but only enough to remind you how rare they are. Frankly, I think the book is too positive, with far too many people saying they love their jobs and couldn't be happier.

You should read it for yourself and see if you get the same reaction. It's a very easy book to read; every interview is over before it can get boring. Everyone has a unique story to tell. The range of professions is wide, giving you a broad spectrum of people to listen to.

11 of 11 found the following review helpful:


Still fascinating after all these years, but...  Nov 21, 2001 By Gregorator
... times have changed.

Reading WORKING years ago was a profound and emotional experience for me. In being presented with the dignity of the most "ordinary" of lives I felt like I got to know everyone in America and, further, I felt I'd been made a part of the united states (note the lowercase) in my own ordinary way.

GIG reprises the concept and, like WORKING, is endlessly fascinating, funny, horrifying, and bold. I think it succeeds admirably -- BUT -- I think it's fundamentally a different animal from WORKING, by virtue of the fact that the world has changed out from under the essential idea of the book(s).

While Americans in particular have always tried to maintain a distinction betwen who they "are" and what they "do", this distinction seems far stronger these days than it did in the post-war era. The jobs described in WORKING were the places the narrators had made for themselves in the world -- not necessarily permanent, fulfilling, or by choice -- but the result of an attempt to find, or accept, a place in society. This is why the stories were of lives and people, not merely functions.

In contrast, the jobs in GIG are just that: jobs. As I read it, the narrators make a clear and solid statement that they do not put as much of themselves in their jobs as did the people of the WORKING era (note that "gig" specifically means a temporary engagement). They go out of their way to make it clear that jobs are essentially disposable, interchangeable, often impossible to feel any respect for: essentially, distinct from what they really want to "be." I have no doubt this is true -- the result of our American definition of "success" in purely financial terms -- and it's not the editor's fault that people do not use their work to describe their place in the world anymore, but -- they don't.

Admittedly I'm generalizing -- but on the whole, society has changed, as have the people in it (vice-versa?) and as a result GIG cannot contain the emotional power of its predecessor. It's an unfortunate aspect of the increasing disposability of American culture -- a price the book is paying despite its great intentions; but when you're finished with GIG, you may feel enlightened, but you will not feel changed. For that, WORKING remains the fortunate product of its time, and still the more deeply affecting of the pair.

12 of 13 found the following review helpful:


What's Different from Studs Terkel's "Working"  Nov 04, 2007 By dolores
I want to start by saying this is not a bad book and the heart of the editors are in the right place. But I looked back at my copy of "Working" to see why the interviews read differently, and found this quote from the introduction by Studs Terkel,

"I had a general idea of the kind of people I wanted to see; who, in reflecting on their personal condition would touch on the circumstances of their fellows." (xx)

I don't know whether this weakness in Gigs comes from the relative youth and inexperience of the interviewers, or from our era where people tend to think of jobs as gigs that they will only inhabit temporarily, until something better comes along...Each individual interviewed seems to have plenty of time to talk (4-9 pages) but most individuals don't reflect on their fellow workers, they talk primarily about themselves and their own accomplishments, and the all encompassing drive to "get ahead." For this reason, it's more superficial, and not as fun to read. The rhythm of the language is right, the casual conversations, but I felt like every interview I read in Working I walked away with a piece of blood and flesh or soul of the individual, and here, although the effort is worthy, the result is not quite the same. I'm not sure if this is the editors' fault or a sign of the times, but I couldn't help noticing it...

14 of 16 found the following review helpful:


Great look at American work ethic  Mar 11, 2004 By Andy Orrock
'Gig' isn't a book to read cover-to-cover, but rather one to be cherry-picked and enjoyed in small doses. The real stars of the book are the interviewers and editors who have done a wonderful job tracking down a diverse group of people, then coaxing the stories out of them. You, the reader, are presented with what appears to be a monologue, but you can be sure that these texts are actually pieced-together answers from some very skillful questioning.

What really struck me was the juxtaposition between those people who would appear to have a lot going for them but have just been mailing it in vs. those people who have everything going against them, but see the glass not simply as half full, but overflowing.

An example of the latter: Janice Lejeune - a merchandise handler. Born deaf. Legally blind through a condition called Usher's Syndrome. Recently divorced. Kids grown and moved out. And you think you've faced challenges?

On the surface, it would be very easy for this woman to give up and simply rue her fate. Yet, she finds value and self-worth in work. She sees herself as an example of what blind/deaf people can do. It's about the most inspirational thing I've ever read. I have chills recounting her story even as I write this.

'Gig' has that type of effect - I really didn't expect a book with such power. These tales will stick with you.

See all 36 customer reviews on Amazon.com