“I Didn’t Know That Neanderthals Could Write”: Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Memoir Faces Criticism for Content and Publication Choices

Gabriel RomanNov 30, 2023

Minute Read

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene’s recently published book has ignited many responses. Critics and supporters alike have taken to social media to express their views. These have ranged from scathing sarcasm to firm defense.

Book as Political Satire

Some people labeled Greene’s book as future “garage sale” material alongside works by Limbaugh, Hannity, and Carlson. This comparison mocks the book’s perceived lack of longevity. It also satirizes the genre of political literature itself, suggesting a trend where such works are quickly outdated and discarded.

Bathroom Humor

One user described the book as “great bathroom material, but not for reading.” They implied that the book is more useful than toilet paper for someone to read. This backhanded compliment indirectly praises the book’s ability to entertain, although in a more peculiar and unexpected context.

A Cynical Remark on Readership

One user was sarcastic and questioned the literacy of MAGA supporters. They said, “MAGAs can read? Well, you learn something new every day.” This comment demonstrates a cynical view of the book’s target audience, casting doubt on their reading habits while highlighting political stereotypes.

Opportunistic Publishing

Critics have suggested that the book is an attempt by Greene “to make a buck before she’s voted out.” This indicates skepticism about the timing and intention behind its publication. This view paints the book’s release as a strategic, financially motivated decision rather than a genuine literary endeavor.

Unconventional Uses

Other users humorously suggested the book could be a tool for “leveling a wobbly table leg.” Like the jokes about toilet paper, this shows some people’s belief in its lack of substantive value. This imaginative critique uses humor to convey a perception of the book as having more utility in practical, mundane tasks than as a source of literary content.

Political Donations

Critics link the book’s sales to supporting Greene’s political agenda, suggesting buyers are more interested in backing her efforts to “create drama and chaos to own the radical left socialists.” This cynicism indicates a belief that the book’s purchase is a political statement. They clearly do not appreciate its content.

Nationalism vs. Globalization

Some users spoke about Green’s decision to publish in Canada and compared it with Greene’s “America First” rhetoric. One user said, “America first but publishes in Canada. Just look away like you ALWAYS do.” This irony highlights the contradiction between her nationalist stance and the global nature of her book’s production.

Questioning Authorship Integrity

Associations with Donald Trump Jr. have led to suggestions to “rename the book. From one Liar to another.” They question both the authenticity and integrity of the book’s content. This critique reflects clear skepticism toward the involvement of political families in literary works. To many users, this book is rife with lies.

Geographic Polarization

Some have humorously claimed, “This book has been banned in all blue states.” This demonstrates the definite divide in politics and discussions surrounding politically charged books. This exaggeration emphasizes the geographical polarization in the U.S. and suggests Democrats will be unhappy with the book’s publishing.

Pandemic Relevance

Like the earlier comments, one user spoke about the book’s utility as being “only good if we have another toilet paper shortage during a pandemic.” This remark combines humor with a subtle critique of the book’s practical value. It seems many people are taking a satirical view of its importance in times of crisis.

Flag Symbolism

Some people criticized the use of the American flag in promoting the book, with comments like, “I hate that they use the flag in promoting MAGA extremism.” This reflects discomfort with the appropriation of national symbols for political purposes. It also shows some are concerned about the ethics of such practices.

Bestseller List Skepticism

Editorial credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.

Some users showed skepticism about artificially boosting the book’s bestseller status. One user claimed that Greene and Trump Jr. buy copies to “falsify its ranking on the bestsellers list.” This doubt casts a shadow on the book’s popularity, questioning the authenticity of its success.

Memory Reliability

The contrast between Greene’s alleged forgetfulness in court and her detailed memoir leads to questions about the reliability of her accounts. Comments like, “In court, she didn’t remember anything. Now comes a memoir?” highlight this difference. This shows the complexities of reconciling public statements with personal narratives.

Seasonal Sarcasm

One critic said, “Perfect time of year for her to release it also. It’ll make great kindling when you want to start your next fire.” This remark trivializes the book’s content. It also humorously suggests its best use as a fire starter during the colder months. This tongue-in-cheek suggestion is a stinging critique of the book’s perceived lack of substance.

Questioning Evolutionary Progress

Some users undermined the intellectual merit of the book. One commenter said, “I didn’t know that Neanderthals could write.” This jab questions the sophistication of the book’s content. It mockingly suggests a primitive level of intellect behind its creation. It’s a cutting remark that diminishes both the book and its author.

A Desperate Bid for Relevance?

Editorial credit: Consolidated News Photos/Shutterstock.

Some see the book as a political ploy, with users stating, “She backed a losing horse by hitching her wagon to McCarthy and is just trying to stay relevant.” This criticism suggests that the book is less about literary contribution and more a strategic move to maintain political significance. They argue this is particularly true in the wake of questionable political alliances.

Reading Level Ridicule

Comments like, “I bet it’s written at a third-grade reading level so her supporters can understand the words,” sarcastically imply that the book is deliberately simplified to suit its readers’ apparently limited intellectual abilities. This belittles the book’s content. It also paints its target audience as intellectually undemanding.

Dismissal of Content

Critics dismiss the book’s content outright, with comments such as, “A book of lies. Not worth the paper it’s written on.” Many users outright rejected the book similarly. This indicates skepticism about the authenticity and integrity of the book. They categorize it as deceptive and utterly valueless.

From Press to Recycling

Similarly, other users addressed the book’s apparent insignificance in other ways. One user said it should “Go straight from the press to the recycling bin.” This statement implies that the book’s lifecycle is remarkably brief. They believe it serves no purpose other than to be recycled immediately. It harshly critiques the book’s lack of enduring value or impact.

Dubious Authorship

There was also speculation about the book’s authorship. Cynics commented, “I wonder who actually wrote the book. I know she is not bright enough to have done it.” This suspicion challenges Greene’s intellectual capability and hints at the possibility of ghostwriting. It casts doubt on the book’s authenticity and questions the honesty of its presentation.