Chandler
A cute, light view into Eastern thought. I loved the intro into the concepts, however, I really did not like and got distracted by the characters interacting with the narrator. I understand that the author was making a point and illustrating the things he was talking about, however, it was distracting and slightly annoying. It just felt like it dragged on a bit.
I would love to keep learning about taoist ways.
Rating: 4.5/5
Rounded down to 4 stars
Read at the same time with my friend while texting each other was fantastic fun. A fun Peter Pan retelling with all the good stuff in it. Ooof that was hot in parts. So good and fun. Saved straight romance for me, honestly. Definitely just needs to be the right one or the right author.
Beautifully written, interesting content–not for everyone. I think for me, the thing I liked best was the imagery and language and the descriptions of what it might have been like to live during the early 1900's, with the most interesting being the descriptions of the Great Depression.
I liked this book... but I didn't.
Rating: 3.5/5 stars
Rounded up to 4
A beautiful world filled with legends and myths that affect the cultures of the place. Wonderful worldbuilding–favorite thing was the different stories of the original races and the queen. I thought the magic system was interesting. All in all, I just wanted more. More action, more romance, more descriptions, and definitely more character development.
Great final reveal. Loved it. Really interested to see where it goes next.
Rating: 3.5/5 stars
Rounded up to 4 stars
I actually really liked the snapshots and interesting timeline of this book. Everything was told from the perspective of the progressing present. At least with the audiobook, it was easy to understand who was speaking and in what time we were in.
The messages about loss, family, time, and life are very cute! I liked this book! Sure, it's dated and has stereotypical presentations of minorities with racist descriptions. It spoke to me on a few different levels, and I liked the book
Quotes:
“Don't you think it's better to be extremely happy for a short while, even if you lose it, than to be just okay for your whole life?”
“Love the world and yourself in it, move through it as though it offers no resistance, as though the world is your natural element.”
“It's dark now and I am very tired. I love you, always. Time is nothing.”
“Why is love intensified by absence?”
“Time is priceless, but it's Free. You can't own it, you can use it. You can spend it. But you can't keep it. Once you've lost it you can never get it back.”
“We laugh and laugh, and nothing can ever be sad, no one can be lost, or dead, or far away: right now we are here, and nothing can mar our perfection, or steal the joy of this perfect moment.”
- Empathize
2. Validate the emotion
3. Provide advice/recommendations (if appropriate/asked for)
4. Validate again
Nothing new added about validation or listening. The author admits that he neither has expertise in the field nor in writing. Thankfully nothing new or noteworthy was really added to the conversation with this work, just a rehashing of other good pieces of advice.
Rating: 3.5/5 stars
Rounded down to 3.
I liked the cute interactions between Austin and Peter. I liked the plot twist of the Mafia connections and Peter's real identity..
Too much happens too quickly. I know it's supposed to be a flaw of Austin's to just make decisions and go with it, but he says way too much too soon. It broke the illusion for me... who would do that in a real situation?
I loved that Austin and Peter weren't stereotypical perfect men–with muscles or huge d*cks. Still attractive with good muscles, but not so perfect that it wasn't realistic.
I just want fun banter with a cute guy and a full, complete life. I want snuggles in bed with his arms wrapped around me.
Eh. It was just okay. It just... didn't do it for me... like I liked it enough for 3 stars, but...
(Definitely just went down a deep rabbit hole exploring what I didn't like about this book and just came back to it after 4 hours)
Ultimately, at the heart of it, the book was fine. Good. The passion, desire, heat was there. It was good. I physically had to turn off the audiobook multiple times because it hurt too bad to hear how badly they wanted one another (loved it but hurt because I don't have that in my life). Once the guys started hooking up, I felt a definite shift in my feelings toward it. It was all too quick and too unrealistic, according to my lived experience. Suddenly it was all about the sex and didn't feel that same tension as before, so I didn't care for it as much.
But in a larger sense, I don't know how much I'm going to enjoy M/M romance books, even though I am gay. I went down the rabbit hole of why women are predominately the ones who write gay romance novels (could be one of many reasons–number of romance authors who are women, forbidden love trope is easily done by changing sex of MC, fetishization, sexual exploration with a safe distance without a woman, etc.).
I realized I didn't like this book more, because it didn't feel real. It felt like a woman's portrayal of gay relationships or gay sex (granted my opinion might be wrong of what I expect a relationship to be like). It was almost like it was the woman's idea of what the male gaze is (and could be for many or most gay men). It just isn't what I want from something that I hear called a romance novel.
I will still read other books. Riley Hart did nothing wrong and honestly this book was hot and was a good read to get me started into the M/M genre. I'm not sure how much I will enjoy the other books I read, but it's still good.
I detested the narrator's voice for any female characters. Not great narration. I found myself mocking some of the scenes because of the narrator. Just my personal take.
Rating: 3.5/5 Stars
Rounded up to 4 stars
A very entertaining read. Not exactly what I had imagined, however, I loved revisiting the different philosophical takes and perspectives and combining it with D&D and other fantasy works. Very fun to read. Not all of the essays were as entertaining or impactful, but it was a good read.
Quotes:
“Philosophers test moral theories by subjecting them to “thought experiments,” hypothetical situations set up and considered in an attempt to decide whether particular moral theories give the right answers in all possible circumstances. D&D games are nothing but thought experiments, hypothetical situations in which hypothetical people do hypothetical things. Of the various story-telling art forms that can serve as a source for thought experiments, D&D is particularly suitable because the D&D player is an active participant in the story, forced to make decisions based on the situations described by the Dungeon Master.”“As the Book of Exalted Deeds says, “Let their choices be difficult but not deadly ... Let their choices and actions matter.” “Where do we get evil? “The sad truth of the matter,” says Arendt, “is that most evil is done by people who never made up their mind to be either good or bad.”” “The primary sources of evil are indifference and self-deception. Both lead me to a life of convention, simply living up to the code of conduct given to me by my society. Arendt says that most people live like this; “they get used to never making up their minds.”” “we don't have much time to really think, and when we do, we don't want to spend our time thinking about what is ugly and bad. It is much more comfortable to think of evil as something done by villains in movies. There is something rather disturbing about the thought that one can become evil gradually. Once you realize that you can be evil without knowing it, you realize that you can be evil without knowing it.” “Every character has a bit – or a lot – of the player in them. With every character I make, I bring a new side of myself to the foreground, for the examination of myself and of others. And in doing so, I learn more about myself, and about my fellow players who are doing the same.” “A man defines himself by his make-believe as well as by his sincerest impulses.” “As Tolkien explains: “Fantasy remains a human right: we make in our measure and in our derivative mode, because we are made: and not only made, but made in the image and likeness of a Maker.”” “in The Will to Power: “‘Truth' is therefore not something there, that might be found or discovered – but something that must be created ... . It is a word for the ‘will to power.'”14” “Fantasy succeeds when it transports us to an imaginary land, and we escape the grayer parts of our own for a little while.” “Escapism is frequently described negatively (especially in relation to fantasy role-playing), but Tolkien reminds us that there are nobler escapisms. Beyond the desire to be free of traffic noise or workplace drudgery, there is also the desire to escape injustice, pain, sorrow, and, greater than these, death.” “It is the mark of a good fairy-story, of the higher or more complete kind, that however wild its events, however fantastic or terrible the adventures, it can give to child or man that hears it, when the “turn” comes, a catch of the breath, a beat and lifting of the heart, near to (or indeed accompanied by) tears, as keen as that given by any form of literary art, and having a peculiar quality.10” “Remember that fantasy succeeds when it satisfies the desire to escape into a different kind of world, but Chesterton's Doctrine of Conditional Joy and Tolkien's concept of eucatastrophe remind us that, at its heart, fantasy is about satisfying the desire to escape sorrow, injustice, and death, not the cultural or technological trappings of everyday life.” “One key method employed by any dominant and dominating system of power (political, social, pedagogical, you name it) is to curtail any collective change that might threaten its claims to legitimacy. One of the best ways to do this is to limit the ability of those under its power to imagine a different kind of reality.” “To limit the imagination is to limit critical thinking in the most brutal way, which keeps people subjected and afraid of change.” “The first step in all of this is, of course, to imagine oneself as a completely different person – but a different person who yet relies 100 percent on the mind and experiences of the creator. We find this mantra repeated in various editions of the Player's Handbook. In the second edition we are told: “The character you create is your alter ego in the fantasy realm of this game, a make-believe person who is under your control and through whom you vicariously explore the world the Dungeon Master (DM) has created.”7 In the fourth edition we are called to “take a minute to imagine your character. Think about the kind of hero you want your character to be. Your character exists in your imagination – all the game statistics do is help you determine what your character can do in the game.”8 In other words, the entire game is there merely to support your own creative vision, not to dictate it to you or to play it for you.” “Irigaray argues that we have an imaginary body that is largely imbued with fantasy. In other words, my body, as imagined by my mind (or ego) is not an objective representation of how it actually is (which is impossible to access) but is an artificial creation resulting from my entrance into language and society with others. What language says about bodies – male and female – within a cultural framework largely determines what we imagine our bodies are, what they can do, and what they look like.” “she asks, that is so captivating in the performance of drag? Whether in a show on a cruise ship or mildly exaggerated butch/femme identities in the gay and lesbian communities, drag reveals something that otherwise remains largely concealed from us. Namely, drag illustrates that gender itself is performative.” “Aristotle said that “there is also need of passage of time and the habits formed by living together, for as the adage has it, it is not possible for people to know each other until they have eaten together of the proverbial salt, nor is it possible, before this occurs, for them to accept each other and to be friends until each appears as lovable and is trusted” (1156b26–29).” “For since they wish to live with their friends, they pursue and share in those things in which they suppose living together consists” (1172a7–8).”
I have a lot of thoughts on this book and I'm still trying to figure out exactly what I think of it.
The authors do a decent job analyzing both sides of the political divide in modern America (although, I think one could say that things are more right-leaning, since the majority of the book discusses college campuses and the left opposing the right).
In short, I agree with the major points of this book. I do think that we need to disagree with the three “Great Untruths” (which are as follows:
1. The Untruth of Fragility: What doesn't kill you makes you weaker.2. The Untruth of Emotional Reasoning: Always trust your feelings.3. The Untruth of Us Versus Them: Life is a battle between good people and evil people.)
I find the book's main concept to be mostly agreeable. I can see their side and see how safetyism is a component in modern life, however, the book seemed to be speaking in a completely idealistic version of our society.. yes, idealistically, we could listen and debate one another about certain topics and have civil discourse about topics, yet, what does that matter if we continue to pass laws and have policies that make life difficult for individuals.
Additionally, from the other perspective, which the authors don't mention or consider, it could be argued that when students shut down or get a speaker disinvited to speak, the students are simply pushing back against the opinions of the person, and, if we are keeping an open-mind on both sides of the divide, people should listen to them just as much as they should that speaker.
I enjoyed many of the concepts of this book, however, I think it is flawed. The arguments seem to stem from the disagreement of our current and then found psychological and philosophical reasoning that backed up the disagreement without mentioned, considering, or refuting the other side of the argument. Why is it that the “liberal college students and faculty members” need to allow for a diverse range of speakers (I know that the authors aren't totally advocating for this, however, the majority of discussion on this point in the book was focused primarily on liberal or left-leaning individuals and topics), yet it's never talked about that right-leaning individuals (church-goers, politicians, townspeople, etc.) need to listen and learn about other ways of life and have an open-mind on things–again, I know the authors did criticize and discuss both sides, however, the majority of their arguments and anecdotes were focused on universities and left-leaning individuals.
Again, I am still trying to figure out what I think of this book.
I'm pretty sure this is the first fairy tale retelling book that I've read. I thought it was good. It really didn't excite me too much since it was The Beauty and The Beast until near the end. I enjoyed the differences with Beauty being a hunter and talking about whether or not she was the Hunter or the Hunted. Well done there. And also, the inclusion or internal dialogue of whether or not Beauty is a victim of Stockholm syndrome.
The book earned its third star from me near the very end, when it discussed the legend of the prince and the wolf. I loved the imagery and the parallels between Beauty and the Beast and that they both endlessly wanted more, which was the real curse and problem all along. I thought it was very well done and told the story in a new a refreshing way. Additionally, I enjoyed the magic and the fact that Beauty basically killed Beast in the middle.
QUOTES:“She wept because she did not know what she wanted, and because she wanted everything.”“There's no such thing as living happily ever after — there's only living. We make the choice to do it happily.”“I would give up a thousand happy endings just to go back with you to your valley, and live as we did. I'd give up every fairy tale I've ever known just to hear you say my name again.”“We thought too much. Because while hatred is a fire only man feels, he does not hate the beast that comes in the night. Mankind fears it, fights it, drives it off, but he does not hate it. No one hates the bear, the wolf. They don't hate the wind or the snow. They don't hate the death. They hate each other.”
This book was boring. I really struggled with it. I agree with another Goodreads user where they mention that this book doesn't use the second person point of view as much, so it loses the unique factor that made Joe so likeable and enthralling. I didn't care about Love, Forty, or any of the storyline in LA. I only liked when they went back to New York.
I think the series overall has potential, but this was not my favorite book.
And just like that, Roshani Chokshi pulls the various plotlines together and ends the whole thing. The pacing, character development, plot, emotions, action, etc. finally hits just right. I read that Chokshi initially didn't plan on writing a fifth book, but ultimately did. Seems like that was the right choice. This series isn't gold, but it's got a diverse cast and tells some great stories. I liked this last book the best.
This series is... not for me. I love the hindu mythology and concepts. I just do not like the pop culture references and the humor. Everything feels one note. Characters are all the same, personality-wise, with only one or two traits that are unique to the individual, and one of those is their celestial weapon. The world is hard to imagine as little information is given on the setting and it's set in a fantasy realm, instead of our real world.
It's fine. i just don't love it and did not want to finish the book, but just kept reading to get done with the series. I just wish that this book was more adult and not in the Rick Riordan-esque style/format
Rating 3.5/5 stars
Rounded up to 4 stars
Joe. Goldberg.
Goodness, Caroline Kepnes does a great job at making her protagonist likeable. Joe Goldberg is something else and Kepnes' book makes you start to side with him. He's just a poor, misunderstood, lovesick individual... or so he believes. Great book, and a great adaptation on Netflix.
Very well written, very factual and straightforward. Doesn't shy away from the horrific acts that these young men had to do to stay alive. I liked the book, but don't feel the need to read it again. I couldn't even imagine having to eat my friend and see them just as meat, but I really like the way that some of them took it: “If it were me, I would want you to use my body to survive.” I would feel that exact same way.
It's interesting how individuals form organization and order from chaos. I wonder if its human nature or if its really really difficult for us, who have been raised that order and therefore jobs and rewards and such are part of our society, to get away from the constructs since we know no other way and it makes us feel safe and that everything is predictable.
Oooof. This book missed the mark for me. I just didn't relate or care about the characters and I did not think the humor in this book was good at all. The crudeness didn't bother me like it seemed to do for others, but the humor just isn't my style.
I sped through this book to see if it got better, and it just didn't. It didn't hit me emotionally and will not be something that I think about. I finished the book for the sake of seeing it through since it was a quick read.
Although this book may not be historically accurate and may be simplistic in nature, I think that it achieves what the author desired to do. Jane Yolen allows the reader to experience what things may have been like for young Jewish people and emphasizes the struggles and horrific experiences that happened during the Holocaust. This is a great way for children to grasp the concepts and learn more about these moments of history, without being too tragic and graphic. Great read!
Quotes:
“Not to act,' Immanuel Ringelbloom, a Jewish historian of the holocaust, has written, ‘not to lift a hand against the Germans had become the quiet, passive heroism of the common Jew. That heroism to resist being dehumanized, to simply outlive one's tormentors, to practice the quiet, everyday caring for one's equally tormented neighbors. To witness. To Remember. These were the only victories of the camps.” - Jane Yolen, author's note
“Fiction cannot recite the numbing numbers, but it can be that witness, that memory. A storyteller can attempt to tell the human tale, can make a galaxy out of the chaos, can point to the fact that some people survived, even as most people died. And can remind us that the swallows still sing around the smokestacks.” -Jane Yolen, author's note
A slow, but lovely look at relationships, memories, and family dynamics. Alice loses her memory of the last 10 years and realizes that she isn't living the life she thought she would. She must decide what is important to her and figure out what it was that she forgot.
I enjoyed the book, once I realized that this book isn't an exciting thriller (as I initially thought from the title and the mystery behind what happened to her marriage). I realized that the other is asking the reader, what would happen if you woke up one day and lost 10 years of memories? Is it more important to see the world how you once did or how life is now? What would happen to relationships and people if we stepped back from the situation, remembering that life is short and fragile and that most of the things don't actually matter?
I appreciated the look into the lives of those who struggle with infertility. It isn't something that is talked about much, even though it is fairly common, so it was nice to see.
Well researched, often repetitive, complete look at how the U.S. government has taken part in a system of racism and discrimination that continues to impact black communities today. I really enjoyed this one and think it is a must read. I want to read it again and look more deeply at its claims and potential solutions.
Rating: 3.5/5 stars
Rounded down to 3 stars
A seemingly well-researched and well-written book by Ken Auletta, giving an overview of Harvey Weinstein's rise in power, his impact in the movie industry, record of sexual assaults, the events of his trial and downfall in 2017.
I enjoyed the book. I can't even imagine having the power that Weinstein had and squandered. I rated the book 3.5 stars, because I enjoyed the book, I thought it was a good record of what happened, however, it isn't one that I felt like I need to read again. I also was hoping for more of an exploration of the culture of silence as the title mentions, yet very little was said on the subject.