rating: 4 of 5 stars

The central premise of Cradle to Cradle is we need to rethink and retool how we design and manufacture physical products. The authors argue that we currently follow a “cradle-to-grave” model, which results in the loss of valuable materials to landfill (which further poisons the land with chemicals off-gassing and leeching). Alternatively, they propose thinking of all physical resources as nutrients, which, like molecules in nature, can be cycled infinitely without loss of integrity and depletion. This would pave the way to a new “cradle-to-cradle” approach, in which. This main argument is set in the context of a greater, eco-centric philosophical mindset, in which all of our actions have ecological consequences and therefore we should seek to assimilate nature’s rules and existing energy and material flows. Finally, the authors are vocally against being “less bad.” Instead, they advocate breaking out of the current trend of focusing on “efficiency” – continuing to pollute and deplete resources, but more slowly – and focus instead of “effectiveness” – eradicating the dangers of pollution and finite resources entirely.

This was extremely uplifting to read and I wholehearted embrace their entire argument. The book is also positively overflowing with optimism and faith in humanity, and it’s infectious. Remarkably, they manage to remain positive even while being sternly critical of mainstream worldviews and practices.

In the first half of the book, the spend a lot of time waxing ecstatic about the joys of nature and asking us to “imagine if…” If you a bit of a cynic (and I think the right amount of cynicism in any situation is healthy), these can get old rather fast. On the other hand, if you lean towards the idealistic side, these can be positively galvanizing. However, I wonder if the efflusive idealism can be a turn-off for more skeptical readers.

This relates to my main problem with this book, which is that studied, concrete examples based in hard science and technology feel too few and far between, particularly in the first half of the book. The latter half begins to get down-and-dirty with case studies and specifics, thus showcasing the authors’ expertise in the field, but it might come too late for the aforementioned skeptics. At that point, I can imagine that some might get sick of all the philosophizing early on and ditch the rest of the book.

Overall, despite having a last chapter of instructive steps for taking action, this feels more like a manifesto than a guide to taking action.

Critique aside, I love that every time I read a few pages of this book, I can’t help but feel buoyed with a sense of great excitement… If you are an idealistic person, then you should allow yourself to be convinced by the glowing vision that this book sketches out. Because it is a wonderful feeling to be charged with hope and determination. After reading this book, really just want to dedicate my life to fighting the good fight for our only Earth. (If only I didn’t already purportedly dedicate my life to 10 other things. =D)

View all my reviews.

As a somewhat wary greenie and also a generally suspicious person, I read this as sneaky marketing on Clorox’s part. Which it probably is. “Nice try, Clorox,” I thought to myself, “But I will continue to boycott BB lip balm in protest of your conniving business moves, even though BB lip balm is one of the best out there.”

But then as I thought about the article, I slowly changed my mind. Maybe the financial analysts are right – maybe we’re actually doing no one any favors by boycotting traditionally “bad” companies’ attempts at self-reform. So what if the self-reform still has to do with profit? The goal of environmentalism is not to make companies and their stockholders poor, but to save the planet. And in order the save the planet, we  need the big product and profit makers to cooperate. And to get them to cooperate, we need to get them to think that, yes, green products do sell better. Speak their language, so to speak.

It’s helpful now that it is actually cool and hip to be green. (No more dirty hippies. The contemporary greenie is a spritely 20-something who drives a fuel efficient sexy car and shops at Whole Foods.) Very very helpful. (I like to think that graphic design was at least partially to blame for this fortuitous turn of events.)

I’ve never thought about it this way before because I’ve always instinctively hated green marketing (most of it smacks of greenwashing). But you know what, if Clorox actually can reduce its environmental impact to zero (Ok scientists, get to work researching non-harmful bleach) and keep true to its word about heading towards greater responsibility… then good for it. Good for all of us.