I started and read half through The Fieldstone Method a number of years ago. Succinctly:
1. This is how I've always written, did not know there was a name for it.
2. This is not a good method, for me, for intermittently delivering business or technical writing on demand. There are other books for that skill.
Rating 3 stars to balance the 1 star and 5 star aspects.
Many people will find this monograph hideous with no redeeming value whatsoever, as can be seen by the numerous 1 star reviews it has garnered.
On the other hand, it's regarded as the most influential book on management of the 20th century. For this reason I find it worthwhile to ready it for myself to understand why that might be so.
Having spent years working as a carpenter in residential construction, I do respect that the author started his career as a laborer and worked his way up through the ranks. That was not common then, and not common now.
Stories from an era where manners fit between the poles of coarseness and primness found in contemporary discourse. Many of the references and allusions may be lost to current readers. However, I found the book really informative and entertaining, and surprisingly accessible with a year of college chemistry.
Atomic Habits is the yang to Tiny Habits yin. They complement each other. Tiny Habits to get started, Atomic Habits to develop mastery.
From personal experience, the material on ensuring habits aren't stale and aren't producing outcomes is the most important part of the book. Building habits isn't difficult. Building the right habits requires considerably more effort. Habits which aren't ultimately producing desired outcomes are indistinguishable from “bad” habits, regardless of the moral content of the habit.
Understanding the how the USA militarily came to be involved in Vietnam almost requires understanding the strategic importance of Laos. Both the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations believed that losing Laos would result in losing Vietnam as well, and they were correct. “Before The Quagmire” describes in detail how Laos was lost to Western influence. Readers familiar with the dawn and prosecution of The Cold War may sympathize with the diplomats involved, particularly J. Graham Parsons whose career was tarnished by his service in Laos. There were no good choices, only bad choices and worse choices, and every choice leavened with the potential of hot war erupting with either China, or Russia, or both, and the potential nuclear consequences.
Readers familiar with characters involved in The Secret War will be delighted with the short but highly complimentary reference to Bill Lair.
This is one of those books where if you “get it” it's real. And if you don't, it's total BS.
Personally, I get it.
For example, I actually know someone that really does have PTSD. Goleman explains a plausible mechanism.
If you're a skeptic, you won't find anything useful in this book, so don't waste your time. If you're willing to consider personal experience as validation for his claims, read it and observe the world around you from a more emotionally significant perspective.
My personal experience? Predictability doesn't imply measureability. This makes the subject an art rather than a science. I'm just fine with that.