I FEEL YOU
The Surprising Power of Extreme Empathy
By Cris Beam
251 pp. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. $26.
Depending on your point of view, Cris Beam’s “I Feel You: The Surprising Power of Extreme Empathy” might seem either laughably behind the times or naïvely, maybe even willfully, ahead — so far beyond our collective horizon as to be pretty darned invisible. After all, ours is an age when the president is more concerned with building walls than feeding and educating poor kids, Congress is polarized to the point of paralysis and just about everyone else is seemingly focused on getting theirs first. We’ve become a nation of hard cases, armed to the teeth, with fury battling cynicism for primacy as the default emotion. In this world, a book with a cover featuring one bonsai tree leaning lovingly toward another does not appear likely to find much of a place. And yet here is Beam passionately asserting that “the pendulum is swinging back toward feeling, back toward love and the communal. Back toward empathy.”
We can only hope. “I Feel You” is less a prescriptive self-help book than a thoughtful exploration of empathy in all its forms — physiological, historical, sociological and even personal, as Beam struggles to transcend her own less than empathic episodes and explores her aversion to opening herself to change. “Self-empathy was code for selfish,” she explains before signing up for a workshop on just that. “One more link in a long chain of American entitlement.” This is a radical book because it challenges the conventional wisdom that self-defense and punitive systems are the only way to keep ourselves physically and emotionally safe, and, maybe more important, because it asserts that it’s possible to work for the betterment of society without the accompanying side effect of feeling like a chump.
“I Feel You” is best thought of as a travelogue, with Beam an amiable and skeptical tour guide to places where a new understanding of empathy has led to new, successful applications. It’s probably fortunate that she is a believer, but not an easy sell. Beam has done a lot of homework on her subject, and early on provides a lively distinction between genuine attempts at social change and what she calls “empathic design,” corporate attempts to make us feel loved or needy or connected — with the goal that we buy more. As a Harvard Business Review story explains, “Enlightened companies are increasingly aware that delivering empathy for their customers, employees and the public is a powerful tool for improving products.” Those adorable Facebook emojis are a case in point. Early in the book Beam tackles that default American compulsion to monetize even our deepest emotions, quoting, for instance, the headline of a Forbes article that offers that the best reason to teach empathy is “To Improve Education (and Test Scores).”
But this isn’t where Beam puts her emphasis, even though this section is as entertaining as it is damning of American capitalism. She’s looking instead for deeper cuts — to understand first whether empathy is inborn or a skill to be learned, and then, either way, to investigate how it can be applied to some of our most intractable problems. She takes the obligatory trip through the history of how empathy has been studied in the past and journeys to the neuroscience lab to see what discoveries are being made about how humans feel.
Some of the solutions she presents for deploying empathy in social situations may be familiar to those working in the fields of education and law. Restorative justice, for instance, “tries to weave a web of understanding and repair. It’s messier than the decontextualized, one-two punch of crime and consequence. It’s a humanized, empathic approach to what is, by design, the passionless metrics of the law.” In practice, this means the student and teacher, or the playground bully and his or her victim, have an opportunity to talk about how they feel, a practice that would probably make the likes of Sean Hannity apoplectic. Special courts for prostitutes and veterans, where their behavior would be placed in context and they would be provided with housing and medical care, would also anger many. To the Fox News crowd, this might be called coddling. But studies of such diversionary programs are showing them to be more effective at preventing and reducing crime than the usual expulsions and prison sentences. And anyway, why not try? Few can claim that our conventional institutions are doing a great job. As Beam suggests, “at a time when the police, the whip-tail of our justice system, are finally being called out for their entrenched and learned brutality, this is the moment for overhaul.”