How We Got to Now

Overall: you should watch this; but with caution. Because it tells the story of diversified kinds of inventions in a comprehensive way, by showing a wider spectrum of events, often extended in history over decades and centuries. And that is an interesting approach; but unfortunately it is done in a kind of selective way

Also Steven Johnson simply falls short of being a TV host. He just does not fit this job. And what is more, a typical post-editing error is made over and over: every time a name or date is thrown at the viewer by the host, it is not repeated in a written form; but we are shown on the screen the quotes being read by the host from journals or documents shown at the same time. So why did they make an extra effort to do that (using CGI), but failed to deliver more basic and crucial information (spelling of the names)? A detail like that just shows that it is a more entertaining and less informative kind of program. And that kind of mediocrity of television should not be done on channels like PBS

As for the incorrect title, instead of "How We Got To Now" this series should be called "How USA Got To Now", because it is so much America centered. For example the viewer may think that the problem of unclean streets begun in 19th century in USA, because the show does not even mention medieval cities of Europe flooded with all kind of excrements, mud and garbage, as it also does not evoke sanitary systems of ancient Rome. When speaking about glasses, the show completely skips the early Arabian achievements in the field of optics. And when talking about printing books, it starts with the Gutenberg's movable type and not with what the Chinese did way before him. And as such, the title of this show is incorrect (and the show itself simply uses a false-ish narrative

For such interesting topics, I was really disappointed.

It was quite obvious that this production crew was more concerned with creative 'shots' and post production editing than actually making a useful documentary. It got to the point where I was actually laughing at how hard they were trying to be creative and original with the production shots.

There were also a ton of stock footage shots that had very little to do with the specific topic at hand. Like, footage of people walking around modern-day downtown Chicago.

The host was brand new to me, and, I couldn't stand him. Very condescending and somewhat annoying.

I love science and shows showcasing science, but this was just a show about how to have cool camera shots ruin a good show.

This series is about discovery, and the origination of what we take for granted. There is no in-depth treatise intended, but it reveals a path from the beginning of a technology, the advances along the way, and what we have now. Personally, even with my strong science background, it was fascinating. I wasn't expecting an entire episode of how modern water purification works. That it started with contaminated water in metro areas and developed into the safest time in world history to drink tap water is what makes this series compelling. Who knew the entire city of Chicago was raised to install a sewer system? How did that lead to subways? Beer is good to drink. Who created the modern time zones we use today? How was fiber optic technology developed? I only wish there were more episodes to watch.

I found out about Steven Johnson with his book "Mind Wide Open" which I listened to in audio-book format while on a driving trip. I liked his style and clear way of writing, but mostly what I liked is that he was telling me, not all, but mostly about stuff I did not know about at the time. He sparked my interest in neuroscience, which I suppose I did not really know existed at the time. I heard Steven talk on his book lectures twice. I am predisposed to look favorably on him and his work.

"How We Got To Now" cannot help but remind me of the series I watched as a teenager, "Connections", by James Burke. Burke had a sophisticated worldly point of view and spoke like an adult. Before Burke was Jacob Bronowski's "Ascent Of Man" which started this type of programming ... with me anyway.

I want to like and watch "How We Got to Now", but I cannot help but compare it negatively with these other programs that I think far outclass it, as I thought the original "Cosmos" series outclassed the new series that was released on PBS.

I am left wondering ... what happened.

It's not that Johnson's effort is bad ... it is not, in fact it is fairly good. The problem is that it is the same as or less of the the previous versions, and seems to be dumbed down. I am picked by and detest this trend in America.

In every single section of this episode of this series there is Johnson full in the camera acting the clown. When did every public programming about science, math, economics, or anything more complicated than Kim Kardashian's ass become something to be ashamed of, or clown about, or more specifically act stupid about?

There's Johnson at Heathrow Airport making dumb jokes about how bad he is at directing flights in the Air Traffic Controller simulator ... which of course he would be since he just sat down at the seat. Same with the worldwide time synchronization organization. The cue seems to be these things are something to joke at, like calling Galileo a misfit nerd.

So far everything I am seeing seems aimed at adolescent children with ADHD, dumbed down so they will not feel bad. Maybe that is necessary, or maybe it is to appeal to the parents so they will be members of PBS ... I don't know ... but what I do know is that this is less than the stuff what was explained earlier in other series that seemed much better, with a more inspirational view of Western Civilization, science and technology. How is it that we can be going backwards? How is it that these things are dumbing down at a time when we know more and depend more on technology than at any other time, not to mention that the pace of change is not at a level that will hit most of us in a very disorienting way before we are even old or retired.

There is no vision in this program, there is no wonder, it's almost like something a smart person would write to seem stupid so he will feel less likely to be rejected.

Is there a conspiracy to dumb down society and the media? If there is I'd want to think that Steven Johnson would have nothing to do with it. So what is going on? Why don't we get anything useful on Commercial Television for our citizens, and why doesn't Public Broadcasting challenge and inform anymore? Has our national intelligence level really dropped in the last 30 years? I think this program would be aimed at the Jr. High School level, so maybe I am not a fair reviewer.

How come this series seems so lightweight? 3/5 and being kind.

I haven't read the book, and I found this series brilliant. Why? Because it shows connected thinking, which reflects the subtle and pervasive effect of social influence.

Steven Johnson brings to our attention a few specific people in their specific social contexts, bringing humanity to the challenge facing the inventor. Quite often, the invention is met with ridicule, e.g. Heddy Lammar's frequency jumping idea, before it is adopted, in this case to protect inter-ship communication. And then, Steven shows the influence.

Steven is interested in pervasive technology changes. Where one invention creates a platform of social change, e.g. the humble neon light and signage, and the corresponding business invention of the 'franchise'.

As a presenter, Steven keeps it light. He is dealing with world-changing inventions and some genius characters. He could easily be a nerd, but he is charming and self-effacing. For all his humour, notice how he ends most of his skits with an understated though defined moment of gravitas. Requires a keen listener, a sensitive viewer, which I believe the material deserves.

I haven't seen anything as intelligent as this on terrestrial TV. In the UK, it is on BBC 3, and I wouldn't be surprised if it reprises on the more mainstream channels.