“I’m glad you left that photograph
of you & me at Harvard
you didn’t really leave it but
I fished it from the garbage.”

This was my first Leonard Cohen book and I desperately wanted to love this book more than I did. Like many, I first found Cohen through his music. I distinctly remember how I felt the first time I heard Chelsea Hotel #2. Which is perhaps why I felt disappointed by this collection. It’s divided into 3 sections: poetry, lyrics, and notebook fragments. The lyric section is outstanding and a huge part of why I rated this book as high as I did.

Most of the poetry and notebook musings fell flat for me. Cohen’s writing was like...hearing a Bukowski poem playing from another room. Almost there, but not quite. For me, Bukowski plays the “sad, drunk, lonely womanizer afraid of death” role much better than Cohen. However, Cohen’s lyrics are unmatched. And, I don’t think this collection will deter me from reading Cohen’s other works.

“The best of men cannot be moral if the basis of the relationship between them and their fellows is fundamentally a wrong relationship. To a slave his master may be better or worse. But there cannot be a good master. A good man cannot be a master and a master cannot be a good man. The same applies to the relationship between high caste and low caste.”

Amazing text by Dr. Ambedkar. Before economic or political reform, he argues, social reform must come first. This was my introduction to Ambedkar and I am excited to read more from him.

"If it is true for you, then it is true for someone else, and you are no longer alone."

"Like justice, it existed in theory."

An incredible story. I couldn't put this book down and read it in just over a day. There is a heartbreaking twist at the end that took my breath away. Everyone should read this book.

two decades after the Hill/Thomas hearings, this book remains highly relevant. i learned a lot about Thomas, i had no idea that he had few qualifications before being nominated to SCOTUS. aside from Professor Hill’s abuse and mistreatment at the hands of thomas and the all white male judiciary committee, the most horrifying part of this book is the story of thomas disparaging his sister for being on welfare while she was caring for a sick family member.

overall, i learned so much. each of the authors had a unique approach to analyzing the hearings and i felt like i’ve gained a thorough understanding of the event. please read this!!!

In this book, Scott considers the judgement of history-how we consistently say "never again" after horrific events and rely on history to condemn bad actors of the past. Scott is arguing that the "moral impeccability to the judgment of history" perhaps isn't as solid as many think it is. Using the case studies of the Nuremberg Trials, the Truth and Reconciliation Committee in South Africa, and the case for reparations in the United States, Scott details how history is invoked as a mechanism to absolve current actors for their actions. She writes: "The invocation of history's judgment suggests an external force at work. It is projection in two senses. One psychic: our own wishes attributed outward, in this case to a seemingly extrahuman, necessarily progressive force-History. The other temporal: assessing actions-our own and those of others-from the perspective of an imagined redemptive future that we will have had a hand in creating."

Scott is ultimately arguing that History cannot be the only force working for change. Real, tangible, lasting change can only come about through the present actions of citizens. History can, and should, be used to learn about past injustices, but it cannot carry the full moral weight of absolution.

I gave this book 3 stars because while I love the introduction and conclusion, and the main thesis put forth, the rest of the book read like a historiography to me. There was too little analysis and development of the main idea-judgment of history. But, I think it is a good introductory piece and a great reference for historians.

Thanks to NetGalley for an ARC of this book!

hmmmmmmm....well...it's obvious that Farrow is a gifted journalist and did incredible work to make sure that these stories from survivors were reported. I was not surprised at how deep the corruption runs, but it hits differently hearing from those that experienced it firsthand.

Despite Farrow's expert reporting, I have a lot of issues with this book. First, I listened to the audiobook and I have a huge problem with how Farrow mimicked the voices of the survivors he was speaking to. Listening to him speak the words of survivors in whining, high-pitched tones struck me as demeaning. I don't see why the voices were even necessary, it would have been fine to just read it normally since this is a non-fiction, investigatory piece and I did not read it to be entertained or have a laugh. I think his mimicry was disrespectful to survivors and it was ultimately hard to listen to.

My main issue with this book is perhaps Farrow's inability to separate his reporting from his personal life. Yes, I understand that he went through professional and personal stress during this story and others, but that side of things may have been better to include in a memoir. Or, a completely separate section of the book where he used his own experiences with reporting and being followed to comment on surveillance and the mechanisms of suppression. The book just needed SOMETHING to separate Farrow's life from the lives and stories of survivors.

Because when I'm reading a book about how SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVORS are risking EVERYTHING and have been risking everything and SUFFERING FOR DECADES, I'm not interested to hear that the author isn't functioning normally while working on this story. Hearing Farrow, a Yale Law School graduate and a white man, worry about potentially being unemployed actually made me laugh out loud. Come on. Hearing about his own personal concerns sentences after hearing about how a survivor was assaulted, harassed, fired, blacklisted, stalked, and suffered severe mental health issues for years felt like a selfish move by Farrow. I'm not saying that he did not suffer while reporting and I am also not attempting to "rank" suffering, but I think this book could have benefitted from some self-awareness on Farrow's part.

My final complaint is the few times that it seemed like Farrow pressured the women to speak. Not in the overt, "I NEED you to tell this story," but rather in the more sinister, "If you don't tell your story, other women will be hurt." Personally, that would have been the last thing I would have wanted to hear if I were one of these women. When you go through something like this, it's hard to even be able to keep yourself afloat. And using language like this puts the onus on survivors to stop predators, rather than just holding the predators accountable in the first place. Some of the women mentioned that that is why they came forward, which is totally fine, but coming from Farrow, or anyone else who has not lived through something like this, it sounds like a threat. Society as a whole needs to question why our first instinct is to tell survivors that they need to report because then they may stop future predation. Instead, we need to prioritize telling survivors that first and foremost, they must take care of themselves. ASK what a survivor needs in the moment and take the responsibility of bringing a predator to justice off of a survivor's shoulders.

Finally, I was pleasantly surprised to learn of Anthony Bourdain's phone call to the New Yorker as Farrow prepared to run the story. Bourdain, then dating one of the survivors, told Remnick that Weinstein's predation was sickening and "I'm not a religious man, but I pray you have the strength to run this story." I love AB and I was glad to see him pop up here when I wasn't expecting it.

Ultimately, Farrow is an exceptional reporter and writer, but not a great author.

"When we dance the earth trembles. When our steps fall on the earth we feel the shudder of life beneath us, and the earth feels the beating of our hearts, and we become one with the earth. We shall never sever ourselves from the earth. We must chant our being, and we must dance in time with the rhythm of the earth. We must keep the earth."

The prose in this book is beautiful. Momaday's words give me a feeling of loneliness and nostalgia.

My only complaint is that the book feels disjointed. Momaday describes this work as a "spiritual autobiography," but I struggled to see how the segments connected together to form this.

Thanks to NetGalley for the advanced copy!

i have very fond memories of sneaking this book into my third grade class at my uber religious elementary school. if i remember correctly, there were several calls home about the ills of such a book—WWCTIHSYDRAW (What Would Christ Think If He Saw Your Daughter Reading About Witchcraft?) I cant recall if either my mom thought these complaints were a waste of her time or I didn’t heed the warnings she gave because I definitely hid this book behind my bible to read it without being detected. It turns out, Harry isn’t the only one with a way to make things invisible.

as we know, Joanne is a raging TERF. it makes me so sad that she is so hateful, after creating a magical world for myself and others to grow up in and enjoy.

“The world is ours, but we walk in it noticed.”

“Was Jane waiting to happen? In my imagination, she was the most driven person I knew. A woman who did what she wanted. A woman who wanted.”

This is an extraordinary book. It is haunting and deeply moving. It is eerie and ethereal. The title says it is about a murder, and indeed it is, but more than that, it is a fitting tribute to the author’s Aunt Jane. Within this tribute is a scathing disdain for those fascinated with “true crime” stories—a commentary on how perverse human nature is. Maggie Nelson also manages to weave a commentary on the social position of women into this story about her aunt’s life being ripped away from her.

Nelson traces her aunt’s life using what little information she can find and does so marvelously. I feel a keen sense of loss for Jane—it is clear that she was a great woman and would have become even greater, if only a man had not selfishly and cruelly ripped her from the world.

Nelson’s prose electrifies the text. However, for me, Jane’s writing stole the show. She herself was a wonderful writer and Nelson really allowed Jane’s work to shine.