Ashley
In Five Words or Less: Your questions about death, answered.
I received this book from netgalley.com in exchange for an honest review
BLUF: Very enjoyable Q&A with a coroner detailing just about everything you want to know about the death business.
The Good
The Format:
The Q&A format is perfect for this book. It keeps the text light and allows the readers to know what exactly we are delving into.
Morbid Curiosity, Answered:
Purcell answers your most important questions:
Do you judge hair people? Like a woman with unshaved legs?
Yes.
What's the strangest item you've found in a body?
I found a remote control and a Snickers bar, still in the wrapper, in the fat rolls of a really, really, obese person. It was sort of uncomfortable having to give the remove back to the family. “Um... We found this...”
“Death is something we all know is coming, yet isn't typically embraced”
“This stuff needs to be normalized.”
The Bad
Though the idea of human bodies being stripped naked and dumped out in nature, left to the animals and elements to desecrate, while researchers study the effects may seem horrific (or incredibly awesome depending on what level of mess up you are), there are tangible benefits to this important research taking place.
Favorite Quotes
I hate, hate, hate to watch shows about death investigations on TV. [...] They have unreal expectations and come up with so many “what-ifs” that it makes things ridiculous! It seems like people look at a case and ask, “Do we have DNA?” No. “Well, then, I don't know what else we can possibly do here. Let's add this to the 200,000+ unsolved deaths and we'll come back to it someday if technology advances.” The realist is, the offender for the majority of all unsolved case is listed in the case notes and is usually someone who'd been mentioned or interviewed within the first five days of the investigation.
If nothing else, I hope you read this book and developed a better understanding of how the death industry works and some of the options available to you. I also hope it encourages conversations within your family about your own wishes for after you die, because when your time comes, your family will want nothing more to honor you by granting your final wishes. Don't make it a guessing game
BLUF: Great book, but does not provide usable insights into depression. (Inaccurate descriptions do a disservice to the disease.)
Plot:Thirteen Reasons Why comes into play after Clay Jensen receives a box of cassette tapes in the mail. These tapes detail the reasons leading up to Hannah Baker's, fellow student and former crush of Clay, suicide. She dictates that these tapes be passed on student to student in the order that they are mentioned in the tape – and has a watchdog to ensure that this occurs, or else. (Ha, I couldn't resist, sorry.) If not passed on, her watchdog will mass distribute these tapes – causing embarrassment for every person mentioned within.
My Thoughts:I won't lie to you; I absolutely adore this audio book. I love the way this book was written. I hung onto every word until the end. Jay Asher is a good writer* and I can't wait to discover other books from him.
Thankfully, Clay Jensen is as obsessed with figuring out Hannah's reasons as I was and doesn't dwell much on his life outside of the tapes, unless he has to. Damn outside distractions. (I say that, but the distractions all added to the story.)
Here is the elephant in the room (aka, my thoughts on Hannah): I can't relate with Hannah. There, I said it. I, who has depression to the point of being suicidal, cannot relate to this teen. What gives?She blames her depression on everyone else. This is not how most people experience depression. People do lash out at others, but typically slip into self-loathing soon after. For someone to craft hours of tape, attempt humor in these tapes, and then to follow through with sending them – I don't buy it.She takes minor situations and exaggerates them. This is accurate with my depression. I can remember, as a kid, crying because I may have hurt the concrete's feelings by walking on it. Or worse – crying because I may have hurt the concrete's feelings by not walking on it. As a teen, crying because I made a joke that the other person took as a joke, but maybe they somehow misinterpreted it and didn't show it. As an adult, just hating myself for every conversation I had – even the simple “Hi, how are you?”s. I can honestly say that I have never thrown my depression towards someone else for an extended period of time. Sure, I've been angry, but for reasons not tied to my depression.She makes readers apathetic towards her and her depression. She makes readers think that it's her fault for how she feels, for being ridiculous. I have mixed feelings on this. Depression is ridiculous. Just look at my exaggerated feelings above. It's not logical. It's laughable. It's, unfortunately, real to us. Even worse, we make helping us impossible for others. So, as much as I hate to say it, this portion of her personality is pretty damn accurate – we make it damn hard to relate, love, and help us.This girl offers no lessons to the readers. She is atypical in her depression. She is petty. She is not relatable even by those of us who have depression. She makes readers think that they should not bother helping those who are depressed because there is not point – they have already decided that they are going to kill themselves and nothing is going to change that.These aspects are very disappointing and I truly hope that this is not the lesson that sticks with the readers.In the End: I know it's weird to like a book about a subject that it inaccurately portrays, but Asher captivated me. While I thought Hannah was petty and misguided, her story is well told. I wanted to know how it ended, even when she was crafting the reasons for her death.*Cannot speak to grammar, punctuation, etc.Medication works wonders – I'm not at risk.
Follow me on: My blog, BlogLovin', Facebook, Goodreads, Twitter
In Five Words or Less: Hopeless romance you will adore.
Plot: Fallon, once a teenage idol, is a has-been thanks to a fire her father started just two years earlier. The scars she received had not only thrown her out of celebrity status, but caused her to lose all self-esteem. Then comes Ben.
Ben, an aspiring author and self-proclaimed F up, falls infatuated with Fallon the day before she is set to move to the opposite coast. Fallon doesn't believe in falling in love until she's 23, but finds something in Ben too hard to resist. They agree to only talk/see/meet once a year on November 9.
The Good:
The Writing: This is the first Colleen Hoover book I picked up and it certainly will not be the last. She draws you in and kills you with anticipation. I did suspend some belief, but she made it easy to accept.
Glass Case of Emotion:
The bad part of listening to an audio book is when the book gets good/rough/antsy, so do I... at work. I laughed. I cried. I worried. I glared at my coworkers when they came to talk to me. The emotional roller coaster is a love/hate relationship, but it's so worth it. (My coworkers don't hate me for it...)
Forget Realism: The characters are neurotic, but some how stick to their agreement of seeing each other only once a year? Uh, yeah.. sure... This is not realistic; however, Hoover makes it easy to suspend our disbelief and I love her for it.
The Bad:
Maturity: I have a hard time believing that these characters are 18 through 23 years old. I was way cray as a teen. I was not head strong enough to jump into somebody's life and definitely not patient enough to wait for somebody I am infatuated with. I know, I know.. this is petty and the direct relationship to myself if unrealistic.. It's just that these characters have a maturity level I wouldn't expect of those their age (and that is factoring in their neurotic moments).
On second thought.. I grew up in a town that has a large amount of teen mothers. Maybe their maturity is simply atypical to us. You'll have to tell me what you think ;)
My Favorite Quotes:
After Ben's (soon to be) sister-in-law walks in on Ben and Fallon:
“I'm so sorry” someone is saying as Ben pulls me into the kitchen, “I had no idea you were home and I was looking for scissors but you are home and she's definitely not a pair of scissors.
In Five Words or Less: Non fiction with touches of comedy.
BLUF: Best for those looking for romance via the internet (good tips and tricks), but good for those simply interested in what Aziz has to offer.
PLOT IMO: Aziz Ansari and Eric Klinenberg introduce modern romance to their readers (or listeners), discussing how romance has changed from prior decades, how we do online dating wrong, and how we can make the most out of digital connections/online dating.
The Good
Audiobook: The audiobook was wonderful. Not only does Aziz narrate it, but he also has special asides for his listeners.
Nonfiction with a twist: I LOVE what is happening with nonfiction lately (or, maybe, what I have just come to notice with nonfiction). I love that nonfiction does not have to be dry and hard to comprehend. I can't tell you have many subjects interest me, but the old texts in the library – ugh – I can only read the same page so many times. Now? We can pick up subjects we may or may not be interested in and be thrilled to learn about it.
I genuinely don't care about modern romance or learning about it. Truly. I picked this up because it won a Goodreads Choice Award and, you know what? I enjoyed this. Aziz keeps the subject informative, but entertaining.
Reaffirmation: Certain concepts in this book reaffirmed beliefs I have or provided “aha” moments. I included my favorite below as quotes, including why strategies to wait before texting back work and how people who seek to be content rather than seek the best tend to be happier.
The Bad
Boning: It's time for me to admit something: I don't watch/listen to a lot of tv/radio/etc. When I picked up this book, I knew I liked Aziz, but I had not listened to much of his comedy. I can only assume he uses the term “boning” in his acts and that I'm being overly-sensitive, but I'm not a fan of the term and he uses it quite a bit.
My Favorite Tidbits:
“What happens to people who look for and find the best? Well... it's bad news again. Schwartz along with two business school professors did a study of college seniors preparing to enter the workforce. For six months, the researches followed the seniors as they applied for and started new jobs. They then classified the students into maximizers, students who are looking for the best job, and satisficers, students who were looking for a job that met certain minimum requirements and was good enough. Here's what they found:
On average, the maximizers put much more time and effort into their job search. They did more research, asked more friends for advice, and went on more interviews. In return, the maximizers in the study got better jobs. They received, on average, a 20% higher starting salary than the satisficers. After they started their jobs though, Schwartz and his colleges asked the participants how satisfied they were. What they found was amazing. Even though the maximizers had better jobs than the satisficers by every psychological measure they felt worse about them. Overall, maximizers had less job satisfaction and were less certain they'd selected the right job at all.
The satificers, by contrast, were generally more positive about their jobs, the search process, and their lives in general. The satificers that had jobs that paid less money, but they somehow felt better about them.”
The Power of Waiting:
Psychologists have conducted hundreds of studies in which they reward lab animals in different ways under different conditions. One of the most intriguing findings is that reward uncertainty in which, for instance, animals cannot predict whether pushing a lever will get them food, can dramatically increase their interest in getting a reward while also enhancing their dopamine levels so that they basically feel coked up.
If a text back from someone is considered a reward, consider the fact that lab animals who get rewarded for pushing a lever every time will eventually slow down because they know that the next time they want a reward, it will be waiting for them.
So basically, if you are the guy or girl that texts back immediately, you are taken for granted and ultimately lower your value as a reward. As a result, the person doesn't feel as much of an urge to text you or, in the case of the lab animal, push the lever.
BLUF: Cozy mystery lead by an amateur sleuth.
I was provided a copy of this book from netgalley.com in exchange for an honest review
Plot: After a customer is found dead outside her tearoom, Gemma races to find the killer before her tearoom meets the same fate.
My Thoughts: Gemma is dead set on finding the killer, even before she realizes that the unsolved murder is a threat to her business. It's unusual for me to read a book where the protagonist has no real reason to pursue the murderer outside of her personal curiosity.
I didn't stop to ask myself why I was even doing this. Why was it so important to find out if my suspicions about the American had been right? Was it Cassie's skeptical attitude? Or Devlin's offhand manner with me that morning? Maybe it was just my own nosiness, I thought with a wry smile.
amateur sleuth
emotional
relationships
A Scone to Die For
BLUF: Pretty Girls a rough story: It is far more realistic than many I have read and it will stay with you (even if in a haunting manner) after you finish it.
Forewarning: I don't know how to review this without giving anything away and I am sorry if this review reveals too much as is.
Plot: From start to finish, Pretty Girls brings together and tears apart a family. One deception after another is brought to light and you can't help, but feel emotionally connected (and drained) for the sisters.
Thoughts: I have to hand it to Karin Slaughter: she holds nothing back when it comes the darkest parts of humanity. It's impressive and a bit traumatizing.
After the first twist, Pretty Girls went exactly how I thought it would go up until it's end. While I may not have been exactly spot on (can you be?), nothing read came as a shock. Imagine my surprise when I realized this “ending” hit halfway into the book. What else could this book offer? The complete and utter destruction of the sisters' sanity.
I know I've said this already, but Karin Slaughter brings Pretty Girls across a line that many authors avoid. It's brutal and will (should) make your stomach squirm. It's a place I've never been to in a book (or real life, thankfully) and I don't know how to feel about it.
I do know that I was compelled to listen to this audiobook outside of work, which is something I very rarely do.
Audiotape: I listed to Pretty Girls as an audiotape. I was hesitant at first with the narrator (I have a hard time with higher pitched voices), but she did a wonderful job. I look forward to listening to her narrations in the future.
BLUF: Monsterland is the Jurassic Park of... well... monsters.
I was provided a copy of this book from netgalley.com in exchange for an honest review
Plot: Governments have become bankrupt trying to contain zombies. Vampires and werewolves are closing in on extinction. Vincent Conrad? He has a solution to fix it all.
–
Wyatt Carter and his friends received exclusive tickets to the California Monsterland's grand opening. While the park is considered safe, first days have their surprises...
Story: Slow start, whirlwind finish - usually I would complain, but not this time. It took me a few chapters to get used to the run on sentences, but it was well worth it. We are shown a little background to each monster and quite a bit regarding Wyatt and his friends.
Characters: Monsterland doesn't venture into high school, but follows stereotype-breaking high schoolers. (Most popular female is smartest in class and infatuated with a huge dork, the supposed outcasts fit in quite well with the popular crows - or is this just a small town thing?)
The combination of story and characters is wonderful and, even though we can guess what will happen, finding out how and what happens is satisfying.
Ranting, sorry: I know it's wrong to read a book like this and expect most things (other than the whole monster concept) to be realistic, but fireflies in California? I don't think that happens. (Petty, I know ;) )
Did I mention..?: I really enjoyed this book!
BLUF: The Body Finder is equal part mystery and YA puppy love.
Overview: Violet Ambrose has a gift - she can see dead people. Just kidding, but she can sense animals and people that have died at the fault of others. Sometimes this sense is auditory, other times it can be olfactory, gustatory, or visual. While fascinating to an extent, this gift can be traumatizing - she found her first human body at the age of eight.
Mystery Plot: When the killer dumps a body outside of town, Violet and her classmates are shocked. Soon after, a local girl is taken without a trace from the killer. Violet takes it upon herself to help the catch the killer, but can she do so without moving too far into harm's way?
YA Puppy Love Plot: Over the summer, Violet's best friend has grown from boy to manboy. He's turned into a real hunk and is completely oblivious to all of the girls fawning over him - including Violet. How can he be so clueless?
—
My thoughts: The concept of somebody who has an ability to sense the murdered as well as the murdered's imprint on the murderer is exciting. It's taking the detective's intuition and pulling it into one of the other senses. I love it.
Unfortunately, these senses aren't quite like intuition: they aren't built up through clues and observations. This means that the reader isn't brought into the trail to find the killer - we aren't able to make our own assumptions. We are left in the dark with no ability to guess the killer.
Don't get me wrong, it's interesting to see her hunt, but not as much fun as it would be to hunt with her.
Now the YA portion, oh my. I can't say I miss the emotional state of being a teenager, but it was captured painfully well...
I can't say that I wasn't annoyed by it. Violet spends a majority of the book crushing on her best friend while, simultaneously, telling herself that she is going to stop crushing on her best friend. Ah, I remember the days of constant self-doubt and uncontrollable emotions. (Or... rather... this book had me relive it.)
In the end: It may be irrational, but I really enjoyed this book. I know I shouldn't as Violet's crush/obsession completely overshadows the murder mystery, but I really did.
I was provided a copy of this book from netgalley.com in exchange for an honest review
BLUF: Very cute, but predictable read.
Plot: When Jenna Scali, a psychologist's assistant, begins receiving emails at work detailing the emailer's murderous fantasies, she isn't sure what to make of it. Are these emails from a disgruntled patient? a prank? sincere? A coed is murdered close to Jenna's apartment and Jenna realizes that her emailer is legitimate. Curious in nature, Jenna is driven to find the connection between her and the dead girl. As bodies begin to pile up, Jenna finds herself in a race to unmask the killer before he kills his next intended target: her.
Story: This story is very cute, what I would consider cozy (almost, the way the killer attacked the coeds may be a bit too much for cozy). It's a palate cleanser - a good read when you want to unwind and relax.
Characters: Our main players are Jenna and her gay friend Quentin. Jenna is a little headstrong - wanting to solve the case by herself and refusing protection or someone nearby even when she feels she needs it. Quentin is her bff. He's always around and available and happens to be her belly dance teacher. He's a good sidekick, really. I haven't read many books with such a good friendship. (It's a nice change from hard-headed, loner detectives.)
Um... Really? Moments: After learning that somebody delivered a message to Jenna at home, her boss suggests that “Maybe someone heard about these anonymous e-mails and is trying to scare you” and advises her not to go to the police. Um... Really? I get that he's trying to protect his business, but a psychologist (of all people) should have concerns over these types of threats. Tsk Tsk...
First published: January 29th, 20152015 Popsugar RC Category: A Book You Own But Have Never ReadMy Star Rating: I won this book through goodread's First Reads programBLUF: Pass! This would make a good movie, but is not a good book. (A movie would likely take away the unnecessary asides and analogies that are on most of the pages of this book.)Plot: Apocalypse Idaho follows a misfit of characters in their fight for survival. Three students, one janitor, and one “better-than-you” movie star wake one morning to find their town deserted and isolated by no electricity or cell service. While determining the best route forward, the group encounters a practically invincible vampire, which they don't kill, but somehow manage to flee from after an intense fight. It's not a question of if, but how long can this group survive?Story: The story itself isn't bad. It's exactly what you would want from an apocalyptic novel. The problem is the characters and the narration.Characters: The two characters which I most hated are one of the students, Nathan, and the movie star, Derek. Nathan does not shut up. He is awkward. His is annoying. What's more, the author didn't mention that he has albino white hair until the last third of the book. (These things are important for my visualization of the book. )Derek, on the other hand, is a total a-hole. He thinks he is better than everybody and has no problem acting the part. He is an unapologetic, egotistical self-centered crazy b. Not my thing.[Spoiler: On top of these two, we have Autumn. Autumn cold-heartedly dumped our janitor for Derek and spends the book hidden safely in Derek's house. After release, she watches the video of her husband about to die and all she thinks is “That's not even where I was, Johnny”.]Narration: The author tries too hard to be funny/satirical/whatever.
“But the darkness doesn't stop her. Julie can see in the blackness. Her last name is Black”“During World War II the factory was converted to fight Nazis somehow, where it undoubtedly helped pave the way for an allied victory.”“It looks Really Really Fucking Big. The underlined capital letters in Derek Darius's voice were audible. It's an inflection point that says, this needs emphasis. One of the vampires is really really fucking big.”“One-Eye creeps forward, past Campbell's tomato soup and well into Progresso territory.”“Still, on the plus side,” Nathan says, “at least we're not in Utah...“
and my favorite:
“Nathan, just because we were attacked by something doesn't mean we're part of a science fiction story. We're a group of Idahoans. You're with real people who care about each other. Yes, we've been through something none of us understand, but we won, and we're still alive. It's over. And even if it's not, even if there are more of those things out there, we can get through this together. If we're strong and we stick together, we can all make it out of this alive.”Nathan's eyes are intent. He's pretty much speechless.“Johnny, are you fucking retarded? ””
On top of this, the constant analogies made me want to throw this book against the wall.
“There are parallels to a hostage negotiation scenario, but the distinct difference is that instead of police trying to rescue hostages there are vampires trying to eat them.”“It seems like the vampires are playing with the group. Nathan saw a documentary once where dolphins did something like this with fish they were eating. They would jump and play and even though they're in the ocean you could almost hear them laughing as they ruthlessly rounded up and massacred the entire school. Fucking evil dolphins.”“It's opinions like these that separate the optimists from the pessimists “There's a 99% chance we're going to die horrible deaths here,” the pessimist might say. “No,” the optimist would disagree. “There's a 1% chance some of us might live.” It's the classic glass half empty half full question, but with probabilities of dying.”
If that's not enough, you have circular reasoning.
“The omnipresent sense of dread is almost absent from Johnny/ Autumn's home. Instead it's replaced with a feeling of familiarity and also of creepiness. In a way, the creepiness is there because of the familiarity.”““If you die while we're out,” he says, “you're going to be dead a long time.””“If Derek Darius is the one who randomly does the expected, then Nathan Montgomery is the one who is expected to be random.”
The narration made it feel like the author was trying for a cult classic and, I'm sorry, it didn't do it for me.Side note: I am one of the 4% on goodreads.com who gave this a 1 star. While I am surprised, I feel like I have to disclose this as I am obviously an outlier with this opinion.
BLUF: If you go into this book decided that you wont like it, you're probably right.
I put everything I heard about this book aside before reading it. Truly.
Twilight follows Bella Swan after her recent move to a small town in Washington. Despite the social awkwardness and isolation she held at her previous school, she is popular from day one. Blissfully unaware, she begins hanging out with Edward Cullen, a handsome and mysterious outcast. After they begin dating (and she learns that he is a vampire), life becomes interesting. From surprise dates to fleeing from a dangerous vampire duo, can Bella's heart take the heat?
Maybe it's just the mood I'm in, but I enjoyed the overall story. While Bella is a character overwhelmed by her emotions, her relationship with Edward was puppy dog cute. The way that his family accepts her despite the circumstances and actually goes out of their way to help her makes for a good story for survival.
Bella: Okay, okay, I will admit, the main character wasn't very interesting. I found it very hard to believe that she was popular among the boys and so absolutely clumsy. She was also very self-centered. When she was in the hotel room with Alice and Jasper, she didn't ask them any questions about themselves or care about their feelings – she only concentrated on herself and acted out in an extremely immature fashion.
Controlling Relationship Much? I would flip out if somebody demanded that I drink or eat, especially at the beginning of a relationship. I would run. If not then, I would definitely run after they admitted to stalking me. It bothered me how submissive Bella was – she is definitely not your strong typical woman lead character.
Sparkling Vampires: I'm going to be honest, I don't really care what characteristics authors add or take away from their vampires. I do understand how the lack of tradition can be upsetting and how it's an easy aspect to use as a jab against the book. (Personally, I was more annoyed by the controlling relationship.)
BLUF: Play about a self-destructing family.
Not convinced? Here is the break down of characters (note: daughters not in age order)
Father – drunk
Mother – drug abuser
Daughter 1 – not good enough
Daughter 2 – control freak
Daughter 3 – depressed & naive
Granddaughter – drug user
Grandson – waste of life
The whole dysfunctional family concept is not entertaining to me. At all. I get enough crazy between my family and the hubby's, I don't need to read about too.
This play did not let up the arguments, cheap jabs at each other, or any of the other punches a family can throw. If that's not enough, you get incestual hints and pedophiles too.
Act I: Relationship background & Beverly ventures off
Act II: Bev is found and put to rest
Act III: General family drama
In the end, I understand that this play is a social commentary, but it's not my kind of read (or watch..).
BLUF: This is a light, fast-paced chick lit. If you expect this to be the new Harry Potter, you're not going to get what you're looking for.
Plot: Hex Hall is a young adult, high school novel. Need I say more?
Fine...
Hex Hall follows Sophie, a sixteen-year-old half-witch, half-human who is trying to live a normal teenage life. Despite moving schools constantly, Sophie can't seem to control herself when it comes to performing well-intended spells to help those she knows. Her love-potion-gone-horribly-wrong gets her sent to Hex Hall. Hex Hall is a school for witches, wizards, faeries, and shape shifters for those who have been determined unfit to go to school with the humans for some circumstance or another. Sophie sees this as her final chance to belong but, after a rough first day, is unsure what the future will hold.
Oh boy, where to start.
Flaws: I'm not going to lie, this book is pretty flawed. The writing is simple, the main character makes stupid mistakes, and the mystery is disappointing.
My Take: Despite these characteristics, I adored this book. The simple writing is fine considering this is a light novel. You don't even have to think of the murder mystery much, which bummed me out. (But thank goodness because the murder mystery was weakly wrapped up. Grr.) The stupid mistakes are fine because she doesn't get away with it. The mystery is unsatisfactory as it comes to an end quick and without much attention.
Cliffhanger: Some people say that this book ends on a cliffhanger. I disagree. A cliffhanger causes the reader to feel as if they are missing out if they don't read more. The author may have meant for the book to end in a cliffhanger, but the ending wasn't of enough substance to compel the reader to pick up the next book. (Don't get me wrong, I am going to read the next book, but not because of the ending.)
Shh.. Don't tell: Between The Host and this book, it seems clear that this is my “Guilty Pleasure” genre.
BLUF: Pass on this classic.
Um.. What?I'm not going to lie to you: I had to Google what makes this book so great. I still have no idea why it is popular. Maybe because it was a hit when it came out (for reasons unknown). Maybe it is because of the attempts to censor this book soon after. If you know, please enlighten me.
Plot: Slaughterhouse-Five follows Billy Pilgrim's life in a haphazard manner. We are led in and out of his life, through good times and bad. We visit an alien planet where Pilgrim is set on display as an exhibit in the zoo. We learn about his time within the army. We even go through his post-army career as an optometrist. It's a mildly entertaining take on a fictive autobiography.
My Take: I didn't have a problem with the choppy writing or with its clarity. I didn't have a problem with the science fiction or the way the novel skipped around. I did have a problem finding interest in this story, understanding its point, and, like most, staying sane through the excessive use of the phrase “So it goes”.
Disclaimer: The only disclaimer I can give is that I don't do too well with older books.
BLUF: Good for those who like to know the background of all players and enjoy true crime that reads like a novel.
Plot: The Onion Field is a nonfiction account of the kidnappings of Officers Ian Campbell and Karl Hettinger and murder of Ian Campbell by Gregory Ulas Powell and Jimmy Lee Smith. Powell and Smith kidnapped these two officers after being pulled over for looking suspicious. After a long night and an incorrect assumption about the California's version of the Little Lindbergh Law (later repealed), which states that kidnapping is considered a capital crime only if the kidnapped is ransomed or injured (His assumption was that kidnapping was considered a capital crime.), Campbell was murdered and Hettinger survived attempted murder. Unfortunately, the pain doesn't stop after the capture and imprisonment of these two men. Many years and trials later, Hettinger is the ghost of the man he once was.
Contents: The Onion Field spends a significant portion detailing the backgrounds of the two officers as well as of the killers. We learn the full depth of the killers' relationship with each other before we are brought to the crime. The crime is short compared to the rest of the content, but the real impact of this book is the aftermath of the crime. Between the trial, retrials, and destruction of Hettinger, the reader sees the effect surviving can have on a person.
My thoughts: When I picked this up, I thought “based on a true story” meant fiction loosely based on the event. I didn't realize that it was nonfiction. Even as nonfiction, the pace of this book was painfully slow. I would consider this a methodical and thorough inclusion of all information necessary to get the true picture of the event, but it was drawn out and I really do feel like a jerk for thinking it.
BLUF: Pass on this. This book discusses morality, but will not bring you much insight into the origins of good and evil, as the title suggests.
When you title a book “Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil”, your readers expect you to primarily talk about babies, goodness, and evil. Pretty straightforward, right? Not in this case. This book spent the majority of its content on goodness, about third of its content on babies, and very little content, if any, on evilness.
Essentially, this book is on morality. But isn't morality good versus evil? No, not really. Morality regards right and wrong, specifically in relation to one's cultures.
As for babies and morality, this book does focus on a number of studies, which found that small children prefer characters that assist or are positive towards others over characters that cause detriment or are otherwise neutral to the situation. It also found that babies are more likely to share with a familiar face than an unfamiliar one, if you want to freak out a baby, just act frozen, and “no baby is an island”. Of course, these last concepts don't attribute to the purpose of the book.
That's about it for the babies in this book. No joke.
An interesting thing mentioned in this book about children is that children (when making friends or choosing who to talk to) are more likely to be drawn to a person of their own race over the race of another. At the same time, children are more likely to be drawn to a person with the same accent (regardless of race) over a child of the same race but a foreign accent. This was tied into morality through discussion of how people treat/mistreat others, i.e. racism, sexism, etc. The idea being that we prefer what is familiar and the best way to make unfamiliar cultures become familiar is through personal contact and stories. Personally, I don't see a strong connection between morality and this information, but I do find it interesting.
The other main discussion involving children was shown to apply to both children and adults: we become bothered when we are rewarded less than those around us. As with above, I fail to see the point that relates it to the book. Again, it's not about babies, not about good, and not about evil. Hmm..
Let's sum up the book with one of its' parting ideas:
“Moral deliberation is ubiquitous, but psychologist typically overlook it. This is, in part, because everybody loves counterintuitive findings. Discovering that individuals have moral intuitions that they struggle to explain is exciting and can get published in a top journal. Discovering that individuals have moral intuitions that they can easily explain, such as the wrongness of drunk driving, is obvious, uninteresting, and unpublishable. It is fascinating to discover that individuals who are asked to assign a punishment to a criminal are influenced by factors that they are unaware of, like the presence of the flag in the room, or that they would consciously disavow, like the color of the criminal's skin. It is boring to find that individuals proposed punishments are influenced by rational considerations, such as the severity of the crime and the criminal's previous record. Interesting.”