Jonathan
Obviously I only read this because I recently saw Plan 9 from Outer Space and I found Criswell's narration absolutely hilarious. I found the book as hilarious as I thought it would be. The predictions are ridiculous, self-contradictory, and repetitive.
If you look at it as a comedy book, an oddity made by someone just crazy enough to think he could predict the future but not crazy enough to become a cult leader and murderer, and not something to be taken completely seriously, you might see that it's a complete success. It's also oddly poetic.
The most shocking part of this book that absolutely nobody talks about is that he predicted that Bob Dylan would kill himself.
On page 63: “I PREDICT that America's foremost Rock-Folk Singer will commit suicide during Easter Week, 1969.”
It was a reading experience filled more with dread than joy, it's such a bleak story. I think I really like devastating stories about the downtrodden and the wretched and their broken dreams. So far every Steinbeck narrative about migrant workers during the Great Depression has been incredibly well-written; they're incredibly naturalistic, the stories are not concerned with being incredibly sentimental, and as such they are great expressions of raw humanity.
Lleno de lugares comunes, a veces fue interesante, pero me enfurece porque todos estos libros de desarrollo personal (libros de autoayuda, libros sobre finanzas, psicología pop) están escritos con la misma fórmula; es casi como si fueran escritos por la misma persona.
This was supposed to be only her first book, not the only one. It's a showcase of some of her talent and a reflection of how much of an unlikable brat she was. However, I feel that if she had miraculously survived her suicide attempt and left Ted Hughes for good, she could have written much better work. What a shame.
DNF. Cannot take more of Ian and Emma, and Emma and Dexter, I was beginning to dread reading not just this book, but anything.
No soy fan de la escritura de Quiroga; parte de ella es francamente miserable y agotadora de leer, pero hay algunas buenas historias aquí; de hecho, algunas son de las mejores que he leído.
This book is bad more often than not. It is mostly unreadable with its boring collection of endless anecdotes. It's written for salespeople and managers who want their employees to behave not for the general public. It's mind numbing.
Fue una lectura hermosa y, creo, una buena introducción a la literatura japonesa, y, por supuesto, tenía que ser de un ganador del Premio Nobel y eventual suicida. Tengo sentimientos encontrados sobre ciertos elementos de la novela, principalmente sobre Keiko, pero creo que Kawabata es un escritor maravilloso y logró muy bien el final ambiguo, tragico y circular.
In this book Mark Manson continues with his mostly juvenile approach to self-help. I find bits of it valuable, but much of it it's rehashed from his other famous book.
It's funny that this book is a biblical allegory, because its moral philosophy is just as outdated as the Bible's. Maybe now I understand why everyone hated that they gave Steinbeck the Nobel Prize. Steinbeck thought in 1952 that the world was morally decaying, and he was right, and he was right about the role that capitalism and industrialization played in it, but he did not have to write something so condescending, simplistic, and yes, misogynistic. Humanity didn't need biblical allegories in 1952 written by CIA assets who supported the war in Vietnam, and we don't need them now. It's ridiculous to believe in generational curses and original sin, it's ridiculous to write simplistic metaphors and exaggerations of good and evil based on the Bible.
This is one of those novels for young adults where the main girl character is awkward, bullied at school, and her family is abusive, and she falls for the main guy character, and he's handsome and athletic, but also mysterious and introspective, and yet it subverts expectations, it even subverts its own clichés.
Normal People is filled with beautiful sentences, and Sally Rooney has a tremendous capacity for writing complex and neurotic teenagers who become equally complex and neurotic adults.
I also find it admirable how she explores capitalism and the effect it has on our relationships and our mental well-being, and how the place and people you grow up with can dictate your future.
James Clear should not write more books. I think all the insights in this book come from other people, not him. The advice is helpful, I wrote some of it down, but as a book, I just don't think it's any good.
Helpful, does its job, it opened my eyes in many ways, but it's not very compelling writing and it's long winded and so much of it should have been edited out.
This book states a lot of things everyone already knows about depression. Its case against SSRI's feels sketchy, even dangerous. I don't think people should read this book because the impression they would get is that they need to flush their pills immediately. Pretty irresponsible.
At the time of writing this story Poe knew a lot about science and engineering but so little about how no to bore the reader to tears.
It's funny how this book is probably the most repetitive book that has ever become popular. I think that speaks volumes about how necessary and timeless all Stoic philosophy, wisdom and ethics are, even if we discard its logic and physics.
No book demystifies Camus more than this one. I read it because I wanted to understand The Myth of Sisyphus, I do understand it now, but I now also understand who the real Camus was. Minus 1 star for calling The Cure a pop band.
Mark Manson writes like a former youth pastor who just discovered reddit. He is like every motivational speaker but he browses reddit.
I don't think this book is that bad, I guess I would say that it needed an edit, but if anything, it would not have sold any copies, so kudos to him.
Even if this story wasn't misogynistic, it still wouldn't be one of the best Sherlock Holmes stories because it's formulaic and it's nothing special. It's a clever story but not an intelligent one.
I cannot endorse his penchant for praising big-time capitalists, even though the book tends to be insightful.
Submarine is a novel about a smart, eccentric teenager, who is also a huge dick (some would say that he is borderline sociopathic). Reading it makes you remember all the different ways you used to be like that when you were sixteen, and all the mistakes you made because you couldn't help but to be a dick. At least that's the effect that coming-of-age novels have on me.
I've tried to read this book since, at least, 2016, but I could never focus, and perhaps I would've not understood it so well. Maybe it's right that I read this at 26, and not 18.
I really enjoyed the book's zaniness, and kookiness, it's very irreverent, and often quite funny. I don't fully love it because there's a lot that should have been cut out of the book.
Reading this is not an pleasing experience, so I imagine that the people who watched the film and loved it for the cutesy, quirky “aesthetics” come out of this reading experience disappointed. However, I do prefer the film, it has none of the flaws of the book, and it has a pretty mellow soundtrack that I always listen to.
It's almost like Backman had an assignment to write the most repetitive and predictable novel of all time and he absolutely understood the assignment.
I don't think moral outrage is the best way to engage with books, but this book is kind of evil.
Some of the advice and insights are useful, but just because a book provides useful advice, it doesn't mean it's good. Holiday's writing is reiterative and derivative, and then he uses so much of the book to praise evil people, using examples of the hardships or challenges they faced and how they used them to their advantage, without any nuance. Maybe the point was that we could learn good things from terrible people, and probably that's where his love for slave master Marcus Aurelius comes from. But maybe I'm giving him too much credit. Two stars.