Book Review: Once You’re Lucky, Twice You’re Good
The content is good, the title is unrelated.
Sarah Lacy’s, “Twice You’re Good,” is a shame of sorts. Let me first cut to the chase, then I’ll expand if you’re interested. Using on my YouOver scale (i.e., would you go back and read it over if you could get the time back) my answer is no, I would not, but not for the reasons you would expect. I blame this one on the editors.
When you buy the book, you think Lacy is going to try to find the answer to the question we all ask when we read about young Silicon Valley millionaires- are they lucky or are they good? Or at least, you expect that she’s going to find some lucky and some good and then show you why the good ones are good and the lucky ones are just lucky. Unfortunately, she doesn’t do this. The book is a huge disappointment.
Twice You’re Good is a hodgepodge of excellent, intoxicating, intimate narratives, clearly the result of incredible access that Lacy managed to secure. She interviews all the big names of young Silicon Valley, including Marc Andreesen, Marc Zuckerberg, Kevin Rose, etc. I confess, I couldn’t get enough, and it’s a confession only because it’s downright indulgent to read.
Lacy fails to make a coherent argument (or any argument at all) about which of the characters are lucky and which are good, and the book leaves you no better informed about whether any of them are lucky or good. I simply don’t have any new information to ascertain whether Marc Andreesen is good or lucky after having read the book. She chalks up Netscape, a clear lottery winner of Web 1.0, as the first in Andreesen’s “twice,” (for the uninformed, Netscape peaked on irrational frenzy and then crashed, leaving no real lasting value). And then she goes on to spend a few chapters on Zuckerberg, the Harvard drop out who’s still in his 20’s. I don’t know if he’s lucky or good, because this is his first (not his “twice) and it’s not over yet.
The editors of the book did a horrible job demarcating the content into a Socratic argument. The epilogue reads no different from any of the chapters. It’s just leftover material. The whole book, for that matter, reads like leftover material.
Another objection I have is that Lacy repeatedly ascribes vision and intention when the men she describes express the opposite in their own words. Zuckerberg says “I never intended to start a company,” and Andreesen describes how Netscape began, much to his surprise when that guy with all those ex-wives called him (what’s his name again? Jim something?). Andreesen is genuinely surprised by the phone call, in a narrative where you appreciate his honesty, even if you think he’s lucky.
The one really interesting and to date, unique, account is that of Twitter co-founder Evan Williams. Lacy narrates the chain of events in fascinating detail (again, Lacy is an excellent writer, with incredible access, but a poor sequential logician). It’s pretty clear after you finish the book that Jack Dorsey, the geeky genius, made Twitter huge, while Williams watched, then Williams couldn’t contain his jealousy and fired Dorsey, took the helm, then proceeded to retroactively enjoy the glory. I suspect Williams doesn’t sleep well at the helm of Dorsey’s company. That’s just a guess.
In summary, the book is not drivel, and it’s heavy and complex, but again, there’s just no theme or argument or point. I enjoyed it, but wouldn’t go back and read it again if I could get my 20 hours back. It bothers me to say this because there’s so much new and fresh perspective and again, the writing is excellent. The structure and editing is so bad, though, that it reduces all of that hard work to a quilt of non-sequiters and gossip.