Take a photo of a barcode or cover
shelfreflectionofficial's Reviews (844)
2.5 stars. If the word ‘quantum’ excites you, you’ll probably enjoy this book. I really did like the first book but my fears were realized in the sequel. It should not take you 1000 pages to answer the question of ‘What is the Looking Glass?’ which is what the entire series hinges on. But I kid you not, you will not get a straight answer until 400 pages into book two which is just ridiculous. That is no longer suspense. It’s stupid and makes me feel like the author didn’t really want to tell us because he knew what a letdown it would be.
I don’t know why but I just couldn’t get engaged with this book. Scratch that. I do know why. What didn’t bother me in book one was annoying here. Way too much extra information, most of which didn’t make sense because it’s fantastical science or just boring. Lack of plot movement. Lack of character development (with the exception of Desmond because we finally get to peer into his memories and unravel how we got to where we started). A lot of plot holes- for example- Elliot from the CDC in book one is completely irrelevant which makes his whole part in book one seem rather pointless. Oh and a WHOLE lot of evolutionary speculation that seems like he is trying real hard not to believe in God. I mean, I’ve heard a lot of theories, and I understand sci-fi creativity for the sake of a story, but this was just comically overblown.
Also, and I don’t even care if this is a spoiler, because honestly, if you’re going to read this book, you’ll thank me for letting you know right now- how are there still people who think killing their physical bodies and transferring their brains to a virtual reality environment forever and ever is appealing? And if they somehow find it appealing, how do they not have the foresight to realize all the implications of it and the fact that it has to be run and maintained by someone, usually an evil, power-hungry villain. And how does this fix the problem of human extinction? We’re going to stop human extinction by killing all the humans and moving their consciousness to a computer before the world has another Big Bang of energy and starts the cycle over again. How is that not still extinction? And it’s super not a satisfying answer to all the first book’s build up of how The Looking Glass is going to protect us from everything and change the way we view our DNA, etc.
So Lin and Yuri are the only people who know what’s going on. But they will never tell you. There’s never time or you just have to trust them. I’m pretty sure when millions of people are dying and I’m standing in front of someone who knows exactly what is happening and also she’s my mom, I’m going to freaking get an answer before I get shot at or kidnapped one more time. Sometimes there IS enough time for a brief synopsis.
Here are the things we are told early on:
“The answer is written in our genes, a code that will unlock the mysteries of our existence.”
“The universe has a purpose. We have a role to play. It’s not magic, or religious mysticism. It’s a scientific process that has been going on since our universe was born- a process that will result in its end.”
Having finished the series here is how those things unraveled: First, I have no idea how our genome and DNA play into any part of this story whatsoever. That could be where the whole quantum thing came in, in which case, I will never get an answer because quantum stuff is the voodoo magic of science. Second, I have no idea what the purpose of the universe is or the purpose of humanity is. There is no hope or goal or perceived utopia. It’s literally just a virtual reality world. Unless Lin actually wants to find out what the “Invisible Sun” is (yes, that’s its name) who helped tailor the earth to be the scientifically perfect habitat for humans to survive on and somehow orchestrated the continuance of this ‘new world cycle’ going on. Do you see the irony here?
So why did I give it 3 stars if I haven’t said anything positive yet? Well, I genuinely liked the first book and this one had a few science-y things I found interesting, but mostly it’s because I just read over 1000 pages and I don’t want to admit that I just wasted a chunk of my life on anti-climactic nonsense.
Cheers.
I don’t know why but I just couldn’t get engaged with this book. Scratch that. I do know why. What didn’t bother me in book one was annoying here. Way too much extra information, most of which didn’t make sense because it’s fantastical science or just boring. Lack of plot movement. Lack of character development (with the exception of Desmond because we finally get to peer into his memories and unravel how we got to where we started). A lot of plot holes- for example- Elliot from the CDC in book one is completely irrelevant which makes his whole part in book one seem rather pointless. Oh and a WHOLE lot of evolutionary speculation that seems like he is trying real hard not to believe in God. I mean, I’ve heard a lot of theories, and I understand sci-fi creativity for the sake of a story, but this was just comically overblown.
Also, and I don’t even care if this is a spoiler, because honestly, if you’re going to read this book, you’ll thank me for letting you know right now- how are there still people who think killing their physical bodies and transferring their brains to a virtual reality environment forever and ever is appealing? And if they somehow find it appealing, how do they not have the foresight to realize all the implications of it and the fact that it has to be run and maintained by someone, usually an evil, power-hungry villain. And how does this fix the problem of human extinction? We’re going to stop human extinction by killing all the humans and moving their consciousness to a computer before the world has another Big Bang of energy and starts the cycle over again. How is that not still extinction? And it’s super not a satisfying answer to all the first book’s build up of how The Looking Glass is going to protect us from everything and change the way we view our DNA, etc.
So Lin and Yuri are the only people who know what’s going on. But they will never tell you. There’s never time or you just have to trust them. I’m pretty sure when millions of people are dying and I’m standing in front of someone who knows exactly what is happening and also she’s my mom, I’m going to freaking get an answer before I get shot at or kidnapped one more time. Sometimes there IS enough time for a brief synopsis.
Here are the things we are told early on:
“The answer is written in our genes, a code that will unlock the mysteries of our existence.”
“The universe has a purpose. We have a role to play. It’s not magic, or religious mysticism. It’s a scientific process that has been going on since our universe was born- a process that will result in its end.”
Having finished the series here is how those things unraveled: First, I have no idea how our genome and DNA play into any part of this story whatsoever. That could be where the whole quantum thing came in, in which case, I will never get an answer because quantum stuff is the voodoo magic of science. Second, I have no idea what the purpose of the universe is or the purpose of humanity is. There is no hope or goal or perceived utopia. It’s literally just a virtual reality world. Unless Lin actually wants to find out what the “Invisible Sun” is (yes, that’s its name) who helped tailor the earth to be the scientifically perfect habitat for humans to survive on and somehow orchestrated the continuance of this ‘new world cycle’ going on. Do you see the irony here?
So why did I give it 3 stars if I haven’t said anything positive yet? Well, I genuinely liked the first book and this one had a few science-y things I found interesting, but mostly it’s because I just read over 1000 pages and I don’t want to admit that I just wasted a chunk of my life on anti-climactic nonsense.
Cheers.
This book is suspenseful in a very slow way. I found the premise intriguing- participating in a psychological experiment of sorts that becomes a little twisted and reality is blurred from the manipulation. In actuality, I wouldn’t put much emphasis on the blurred reality part of the advertised summary- not really the plot. There’s times Jessica wonders if an everyday encounter is part of the experiment but it’s not really a ‘is she losing her mind’ kind of manipulation.
Jessica enters a psychology study to earn more money for her family and the conductor of the study, Dr. Shields (no relation to me), takes a special interest in Jessica and asks more and more of her in future parts of the study. So there’s this mystery of why Dr Shields is doing this study, why such an interest in Jessica, what happened to Subject 5, and can Dr Shields’ spouse be trusted? To be honest, I was expecting darker answers to those questions than what turned out to be the case. I found the ending a little anti-climactic. I thought there would be a little more pulse-pounding action instead of neatly wrapping everything up with a bow.
But I would still recommend this book. It was still engaging and as a psych minor, I enjoyed the psychology intertwined within, a lot of the referenced psych studies I remember from my classes. As long as you don’t go into it expecting a lot of intense action and suspense I think you’ll really like the story and seeing how things unfold. And it’s kinda a freaky scenario to think about. The implications of something like this happening, of a therapist having such personal information and manipulating clients and having the capability to affect and influence their life is definitely worth exploring in a psychological thriller like this.
One writing style thing to mention: the chapters alternate POVs. It’s either told from Jessica’s point of view (3rd person) where we can hear her thoughts or from Dr. Shields’ (first person). But with Dr. Shields’ chapters it’s almost in letter or diary form directly addressing Jessica- which I didn’t really like. It definitely makes it more creepy I suppose, but some of the vocabulary or descriptions seemed unnatural for that type of writing.
All in all- good book, will probably read others written by these authors.
Jessica enters a psychology study to earn more money for her family and the conductor of the study, Dr. Shields (no relation to me), takes a special interest in Jessica and asks more and more of her in future parts of the study. So there’s this mystery of why Dr Shields is doing this study, why such an interest in Jessica, what happened to Subject 5, and can Dr Shields’ spouse be trusted? To be honest, I was expecting darker answers to those questions than what turned out to be the case. I found the ending a little anti-climactic. I thought there would be a little more pulse-pounding action instead of neatly wrapping everything up with a bow.
But I would still recommend this book. It was still engaging and as a psych minor, I enjoyed the psychology intertwined within, a lot of the referenced psych studies I remember from my classes. As long as you don’t go into it expecting a lot of intense action and suspense I think you’ll really like the story and seeing how things unfold. And it’s kinda a freaky scenario to think about. The implications of something like this happening, of a therapist having such personal information and manipulating clients and having the capability to affect and influence their life is definitely worth exploring in a psychological thriller like this.
One writing style thing to mention: the chapters alternate POVs. It’s either told from Jessica’s point of view (3rd person) where we can hear her thoughts or from Dr. Shields’ (first person). But with Dr. Shields’ chapters it’s almost in letter or diary form directly addressing Jessica- which I didn’t really like. It definitely makes it more creepy I suppose, but some of the vocabulary or descriptions seemed unnatural for that type of writing.
All in all- good book, will probably read others written by these authors.
"Don't sorrow so. The winter is gone."
"But it is gone because I have fed the fire, and it wants more wood."
The winter Staryk king vs the fiery demon-possessed tsar.
Miryem, a moneylender, and Irina, newly married to the tsar, are caught between these warring powerhouses and their people's livelihoods hang in the balance. A story with strong female leads, we see three women rise up and do whatever it takes to protect the people they love.
"The world I wanted wasn't the world I lived in, and if I would do nothing until I could repair every terrible thing at once, I would do nothing forever."
With Jewish/Russian/Nordic tones, Novik has created a dramatic. icy fantasy world full of mystery and beauty. I like that she doesn't tell you exactly what's going on but rather drops you into the middle of a saga. You gradually discover the magic and even by the end, all of your questions about these kingdoms and the way they interact are left to the imagination.
It starts from Miryem's POV but as other characters are introduced and become significant, new POVs are added. Novik gives each character their own voice and provides enough context clues to help you identify who's talking.
I don't read a lot from the fantasy genre, but Novik has definitely created something worth reading, and I look forward to reading her other books.
"But it is gone because I have fed the fire, and it wants more wood."
The winter Staryk king vs the fiery demon-possessed tsar.
Miryem, a moneylender, and Irina, newly married to the tsar, are caught between these warring powerhouses and their people's livelihoods hang in the balance. A story with strong female leads, we see three women rise up and do whatever it takes to protect the people they love.
"The world I wanted wasn't the world I lived in, and if I would do nothing until I could repair every terrible thing at once, I would do nothing forever."
With Jewish/Russian/Nordic tones, Novik has created a dramatic. icy fantasy world full of mystery and beauty. I like that she doesn't tell you exactly what's going on but rather drops you into the middle of a saga. You gradually discover the magic and even by the end, all of your questions about these kingdoms and the way they interact are left to the imagination.
It starts from Miryem's POV but as other characters are introduced and become significant, new POVs are added. Novik gives each character their own voice and provides enough context clues to help you identify who's talking.
I don't read a lot from the fantasy genre, but Novik has definitely created something worth reading, and I look forward to reading her other books.
I didn't know this was a novella when I started reading it. I'm not usually a fan of short stories so I can't hold it against Anne Perry and will still give her William Monk series another try, but A Christmas Resolution did not change my opinion about short stories. There just isn't enough book to really develop any characters or spin a complex or interesting story. I feel like you can read the summary of this book and really have all the information you would get if you actually read the story. I suppose it's one of those 'cozy' reads if that interests you. But even the Christmas aspect of it didn't feel very tangible to me.
Basically the whole story is: Celia's friend Clementine is engaged to a man with a hard past that may or may not be dangerous. Her husband who is a policeman tries to find out while Celia worries about her friend and struggles with whether or not she is being judgmental and denying them both a chance at happiness. That's it. The results of the investigation aren't super surprising- which is fine, I read plenty of mysteries that I can figure out- but there just wasn't enough pages to really do anything with it in my opinion.
I am also confused by the title of it- A Christmas Resolution. After reading it, I am not entirely sure what the resolution was and who was making it. They talk a lot about forgiveness so maybe they decide to forgive more?
Another thing to keep in mind- it's set in a time period where men and women's roles were not what they are today. So it'll probably make you cringe, but we can at least recognize how far we've come from that at least.
So the positives: it's a feel-good story, it portrays a healthy marriage between Celia and Hooper, it has a message of forgiveness, it's a quick read (a pro since I didn't like it that much)
The negatives: to me, it was boring and lacked depth
I'm guessing if the cover of this book appeals to you and looks like something you would like, then you probably would like it. I just prefer longer, more complex or hard-hitting books. If I was going to read a cozy Christmas mystery then I would have preferred to have the Christmas part more tangible and descriptive... like a Hallmark Christmas movie.
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
Basically the whole story is: Celia's friend Clementine is engaged to a man with a hard past that may or may not be dangerous. Her husband who is a policeman tries to find out while Celia worries about her friend and struggles with whether or not she is being judgmental and denying them both a chance at happiness. That's it. The results of the investigation aren't super surprising- which is fine, I read plenty of mysteries that I can figure out- but there just wasn't enough pages to really do anything with it in my opinion.
I am also confused by the title of it- A Christmas Resolution. After reading it, I am not entirely sure what the resolution was and who was making it. They talk a lot about forgiveness so maybe they decide to forgive more?
Another thing to keep in mind- it's set in a time period where men and women's roles were not what they are today. So it'll probably make you cringe, but we can at least recognize how far we've come from that at least.
So the positives: it's a feel-good story, it portrays a healthy marriage between Celia and Hooper, it has a message of forgiveness, it's a quick read (a pro since I didn't like it that much)
The negatives: to me, it was boring and lacked depth
I'm guessing if the cover of this book appeals to you and looks like something you would like, then you probably would like it. I just prefer longer, more complex or hard-hitting books. If I was going to read a cozy Christmas mystery then I would have preferred to have the Christmas part more tangible and descriptive... like a Hallmark Christmas movie.
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
3 stars mainly because if this had a movie rating it would be rated R and I just think that's unnecessary. Mostly for language- Very rarely did a character speak or think without swearing. There was some sexual content and gore but nothing really graphic. Considering the setting of the book is dystopian and within that setting a lot of the story takes place in the depraved sectors of the city, some of the content is understandable in order to portray said depravity, but it can be done in a better way.
This book leaves you on a cliffhanger (a second book fairly likely) however, because of everything just mentioned I'm sad to have to leave the story. It really was an interesting premise- A futuristic dystopian Midwest settlement where people are divided between Complex, Legacy, or Arc living depending on their wealth, social scoring, or desperation. Val and Kat are eking out a living in Legacy after their dad dies when Kat is kidnapped. The sisters' paths become entangled with other characters as Val tries to find Kat amidst increasing violence in their home sector and the entrance of a potential pandemic-sized virus.
As others have said, it does take a minute to get your bearings as we aren't given much background as to the 'why' the world is the way it is. Some of it is hard to picture, though I would bet if it was cinematized it would be reminiscent of Total Recall mixed with Maze Runner. It is told from several different POVs. They are each introduced at the beginning in their own story. Seemingly disjointed, they all eventually come together at some point in the story. I did make a few notes on each one to help me keep everyone straight since the book is long and I would be reading it off and on. I had a hard time distinguishing between the character's own thoughts and the voice of the AI, but since I was reading an ARC, I'm assuming the published version will differentiate that better... and also fix the grammatical errors I kept finding.
I would assume part of the author's intent was to make some sort of political/economic statement. What one would give up for comfort and security. What one would endure for freedom. How it's hard to move up in the world. The manipulation and oppression of the poor. The psychological benefits of having work to do. The scoring of a person's behavior and choices to incentivize a particular end result. The consequences of lack of law enforcement. I could see a college class analyzing those components of the story.
Though Enderly had no qualms with profanity, to his credit, he wrote suspense successfully. There is a lot of plot movement and action in the story. He is not afraid to kill off or injure his characters, so you never know what will happen.
Looking back on the book as I write this review, I think this book had a lot of potential, but I just think all the things that would make it rated R just really over shadows the good parts for me. I hate when authors include so much of that. A good story shouldn't need it. If that stuff doesn't bother you and you love a good sci-fy, futuristic, dystopian action story, then this is for you.
Sidenote: Lots of authors end up overusing certain words in their books that I like to point out. In this book, it was the word 'effluence'
This book leaves you on a cliffhanger (a second book fairly likely) however, because of everything just mentioned I'm sad to have to leave the story. It really was an interesting premise- A futuristic dystopian Midwest settlement where people are divided between Complex, Legacy, or Arc living depending on their wealth, social scoring, or desperation. Val and Kat are eking out a living in Legacy after their dad dies when Kat is kidnapped. The sisters' paths become entangled with other characters as Val tries to find Kat amidst increasing violence in their home sector and the entrance of a potential pandemic-sized virus.
As others have said, it does take a minute to get your bearings as we aren't given much background as to the 'why' the world is the way it is. Some of it is hard to picture, though I would bet if it was cinematized it would be reminiscent of Total Recall mixed with Maze Runner. It is told from several different POVs. They are each introduced at the beginning in their own story. Seemingly disjointed, they all eventually come together at some point in the story. I did make a few notes on each one to help me keep everyone straight since the book is long and I would be reading it off and on. I had a hard time distinguishing between the character's own thoughts and the voice of the AI, but since I was reading an ARC, I'm assuming the published version will differentiate that better... and also fix the grammatical errors I kept finding.
I would assume part of the author's intent was to make some sort of political/economic statement. What one would give up for comfort and security. What one would endure for freedom. How it's hard to move up in the world. The manipulation and oppression of the poor. The psychological benefits of having work to do. The scoring of a person's behavior and choices to incentivize a particular end result. The consequences of lack of law enforcement. I could see a college class analyzing those components of the story.
Though Enderly had no qualms with profanity, to his credit, he wrote suspense successfully. There is a lot of plot movement and action in the story. He is not afraid to kill off or injure his characters, so you never know what will happen.
Spoiler
BUT- I knew as soon as there was AI in people's heads that the AI was gonna go rogue. Because based on literally every depiction of AI, their overtaking of humanity is inevitable. It's a bit of a tired premise, but if there are still people out there who are still trying to probe the depths of AI/human combinations, then I suppose we need more books and movies showing how stupid of an idea that is.Looking back on the book as I write this review, I think this book had a lot of potential, but I just think all the things that would make it rated R just really over shadows the good parts for me. I hate when authors include so much of that. A good story shouldn't need it. If that stuff doesn't bother you and you love a good sci-fy, futuristic, dystopian action story, then this is for you.
Sidenote: Lots of authors end up overusing certain words in their books that I like to point out. In this book, it was the word 'effluence'
This is a great year-long journey through one of the most loved books of the Bible- the Psalms. I am not one for fluffy books, especially ones that will take me an entire year to read and I find a lot of devotionals to be more about the author's words than God's. What I appreciated about this book is Tim and Kathy Keller's desire to help us read the Bible as it was intended, to meditate on the words and maintain sound doctrine, not the 'mystical.' He says that Psalms was "written to be a course of prayed theology that helps you process every possible personal situation through the truth about God." Keller's Bible and theology knowledge is evident in the short commentary he provides for each Psalm or Psalm section, but the meditations are biblical and do not focus on his own experiences.
It's easy to read through Psalms and say- Okay, this one is about praise, here's one about feeling alone, here's another one on praise, another one on all the evil in the world, etc-- but Keller makes profound connections and helps us turn the Bible's words inward- convicting, encouraging, and inspiring deeper communication with the Lord, reminding us that Scripture is alive and relevant to today.
The book is entitled The Songs of Jesus, which is interesting because most of the time when we hear 'Psalms' we think 'David' but Keller takes each Psalm and beats a path to Jesus and his saving grace. I'm constantly growing in faith and recognizing God's hand in all things- including the Bible He inspired and directed to tell His ongoing redemption story. The Psalms truly are the songs of Jesus and how sweet it is that we can read them.
The introductory pages are just as important as the rest as he lays out his plan for the book and provides helpful questions for us to make the most of each meditation: ADORE (What did you learn about God for which you could praise or thank him?), ADMIT (What did you learn about yourself for which you could repent?), and ASPIRE (What did you learn about life that you could aspire to, ask for, and act on?) What great questions to even write in your Bible to use for all the other books of the Bible as well!
Each day/page is a short section of Scripture- anywhere from 3-10 verses, followed by a short paragraph in commentary and cross-references to other Scriptures or biblical events, and concluded with a short prayer. I loved the prayer section because a lot of times we read Scripture and think- what do I do with this knowledge? Keller's prayers are helpful prompts to begin praying the Bible passage into your life. I found it benefited me most when I would write out his prayer word for word in a journal and then expound on it and pray it specifically for myself or others in my life.
I wanted to focus more on praying this year and praying for my kids so this book was an encouragement to me to have daily prayers for my children that were directly from Scripture. I know that I will go through this book again.
It's designed to be read in a year, but really you could go at any pace. Each devotional has a date at the top. If it's hard for you to do one every day, just keep it by your bed or your couch and whenever you have time, just do the one for whatever day it is. The commentaries don't build on each other so reading them out of order does not matter. Any time spent reading the Bible is valuable so do whatever you can!
We are about to begin 2021 and I would highly recommend this book and encourage this to be something you consider making a priority for the new year. Would also make a great gift!
It's easy to read through Psalms and say- Okay, this one is about praise, here's one about feeling alone, here's another one on praise, another one on all the evil in the world, etc-- but Keller makes profound connections and helps us turn the Bible's words inward- convicting, encouraging, and inspiring deeper communication with the Lord, reminding us that Scripture is alive and relevant to today.
The book is entitled The Songs of Jesus, which is interesting because most of the time when we hear 'Psalms' we think 'David' but Keller takes each Psalm and beats a path to Jesus and his saving grace. I'm constantly growing in faith and recognizing God's hand in all things- including the Bible He inspired and directed to tell His ongoing redemption story. The Psalms truly are the songs of Jesus and how sweet it is that we can read them.
The introductory pages are just as important as the rest as he lays out his plan for the book and provides helpful questions for us to make the most of each meditation: ADORE (What did you learn about God for which you could praise or thank him?), ADMIT (What did you learn about yourself for which you could repent?), and ASPIRE (What did you learn about life that you could aspire to, ask for, and act on?) What great questions to even write in your Bible to use for all the other books of the Bible as well!
Each day/page is a short section of Scripture- anywhere from 3-10 verses, followed by a short paragraph in commentary and cross-references to other Scriptures or biblical events, and concluded with a short prayer. I loved the prayer section because a lot of times we read Scripture and think- what do I do with this knowledge? Keller's prayers are helpful prompts to begin praying the Bible passage into your life. I found it benefited me most when I would write out his prayer word for word in a journal and then expound on it and pray it specifically for myself or others in my life.
I wanted to focus more on praying this year and praying for my kids so this book was an encouragement to me to have daily prayers for my children that were directly from Scripture. I know that I will go through this book again.
It's designed to be read in a year, but really you could go at any pace. Each devotional has a date at the top. If it's hard for you to do one every day, just keep it by your bed or your couch and whenever you have time, just do the one for whatever day it is. The commentaries don't build on each other so reading them out of order does not matter. Any time spent reading the Bible is valuable so do whatever you can!
We are about to begin 2021 and I would highly recommend this book and encourage this to be something you consider making a priority for the new year. Would also make a great gift!
This is a short, fast read that has far-reaching benefits. It's easy to read the Bible with no concept of how what you're reading fits into the Bible as a whole. This is a great guide to give you the framework you need to help read Scripture in light of three main pillars: Creation, Covenant, and Kingdom. The book is easy to understand and well-organized. At the end of each chapter (or each 'word') he provides an OT and NT verse as well as a summary sentence for that word. As someone who grew up in the church and is pretty familiar with my Bible, this book served as a good reminder that there is always more that is revealed in Scripture the more time you spend in it and I look forward to seeing new connections and knowledge with these themes in mind. The Bible is an amazing book that could not be the masterpiece it is without the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The depth God has revealed to us in it is stunning and I'm thankful for books like this that remind me of that!
My main issue with this book was the swearing and language. *F- you* was a common thread. Lots of f bombs and all the other swear words and just crass talk in general. I don’t know if that’s how normal people talk but even if it was, do we really need to spell it all out?! And for that reason, I won’t be reading any more of his books.
This book was given to me as a gift. I had not read anything else by this author before but a friend of my husband thought I would like it because I like these types of books and I live in Iowa- which is where the whole book takes place. I will admit, it was fun to read about places or things that I’m familiar with. Although with all the Iowa town/road name dropping in the book, my hometown wasn’t mentioned, but you can’t have it all!
Honestly I think the language hindered my ability to engage or be objective about the storyline and characters but let’s review it anyway. Having not read any other books, I did not feel any real interest with the characters. I did not see any growth or development. They all seemed a little flat to me.
The premise: a radical political party near Pella hates a presidential candidate and plans to kill her. It’s a game of cat and mouse- Lucas (the main guy; rich and stylish ex-cop) must figure out who made the threats and get to them before they enact their plan. So as the reader, we know who the culprits are from the beginning. Not usually my preference but I will say, for all his flaws, Sandford did create good suspense. It’s a long book and I read it pretty quickly for that reason.
As for the “realistic” aspect of the story- with these kind of books you suspend parts of reality for the story whether that be legal realities or political realities- I did not read it too critically in that regard BUT THE ONE THING: the main info Lucas has to go off of to find these people is that it’s an old woman with curly white hair with a son with “distinctive grey eyes.” (mentioned like 50+ times) What does that mean?? Grey eyes are the least interesting eyes out there. And people don’t really register people’s eye color, like ever. How would anyone be able to identify distinctive grey eyes or when asked go- “Oh yeah- what’s his head has distinctive grey eyes. It’s surely not the other hundred people I know, they have distinctive blue eyes, hazel eyes, and brown eyes respectively. But I could never forget those grey eyes.” Is it just me?? Do you guys take note of people’s eyes?? Are you thinking of someone with grey eyes right now?? Sigh. Sometimes reality needs to be reality and authors need to think of some better leads for cops to have. Also, if someone can share with me a person who has distinctive grey eyes, I will change my 3 stars to 4.
So anyway. If language doesn’t bother you, you’ll like this book. AND you’ll get a nice little tour of the great state of Iowa.
This book was given to me as a gift. I had not read anything else by this author before but a friend of my husband thought I would like it because I like these types of books and I live in Iowa- which is where the whole book takes place. I will admit, it was fun to read about places or things that I’m familiar with. Although with all the Iowa town/road name dropping in the book, my hometown wasn’t mentioned, but you can’t have it all!
Honestly I think the language hindered my ability to engage or be objective about the storyline and characters but let’s review it anyway. Having not read any other books, I did not feel any real interest with the characters. I did not see any growth or development. They all seemed a little flat to me.
The premise: a radical political party near Pella hates a presidential candidate and plans to kill her. It’s a game of cat and mouse- Lucas (the main guy; rich and stylish ex-cop) must figure out who made the threats and get to them before they enact their plan. So as the reader, we know who the culprits are from the beginning. Not usually my preference but I will say, for all his flaws, Sandford did create good suspense. It’s a long book and I read it pretty quickly for that reason.
As for the “realistic” aspect of the story- with these kind of books you suspend parts of reality for the story whether that be legal realities or political realities- I did not read it too critically in that regard BUT THE ONE THING: the main info Lucas has to go off of to find these people is that it’s an old woman with curly white hair with a son with “distinctive grey eyes.” (mentioned like 50+ times) What does that mean?? Grey eyes are the least interesting eyes out there. And people don’t really register people’s eye color, like ever. How would anyone be able to identify distinctive grey eyes or when asked go- “Oh yeah- what’s his head has distinctive grey eyes. It’s surely not the other hundred people I know, they have distinctive blue eyes, hazel eyes, and brown eyes respectively. But I could never forget those grey eyes.” Is it just me?? Do you guys take note of people’s eyes?? Are you thinking of someone with grey eyes right now?? Sigh. Sometimes reality needs to be reality and authors need to think of some better leads for cops to have. Also, if someone can share with me a person who has distinctive grey eyes, I will change my 3 stars to 4.
So anyway. If language doesn’t bother you, you’ll like this book. AND you’ll get a nice little tour of the great state of Iowa.
I vaguely knew about this guy- you know... the guy with the eye patch. Well. Turns out he has some interesting things to say.
Here's the thing. The book is called 'Fortitude.' Fortitude means "strong-mindedness" and "resilience." So we must first ask: Is Dan Crenshaw qualified to talk to me about resilience? And the answer is a resounding yes. Politics aside, we learn that Crenshaw lost his mom to cancer when he was very young. He also went through the brutal training to become a Navy SEAL (part of it twice because he broke his leg). He was deployed in Afghanistan and was blown up by an IED. He lost an eye and endured a risky surgery and subsequent 6 weeks facedown recovery to save minimal vision in his other eye. And here he is: a member of the House of Representatives with a Master of Public Admin from Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.
So yeah. I think I'll listen to what he has to say about mental toughness and overcoming suffering.
The goal of his book is to instill resilience amidst an outrage culture. He is quick to clarify that there is indeed true injustice, wrongdoing, tragedy, and grief. There is a proper time to be outraged. What he is discussing in his book is an outrage that has been normalized that assumes the worst about people and glorifies victimhood. "It is about the hypersensitivity that has infected our society, where undesirable language is the equivalent of physical violence, where an old tweet or Facebook post can be grounds for ruination and public shame, and where an absence of reason or fact encourages public indictment, moral outrage, and mob rule. Outrage culture is the weaponization of emotion, and the elevation of emotion above reason."
I am onboard with this premise. Every day you see a headline reporting someone new being cancelled for "offensive" things. Groveling apologies ensue but are never enough for the mob. How did we get here? Life is now tedious, hoping we aren't the next ones called out for who knows what.
I agree with Barack Obama on this one. He says, “If you’re narrowly defining political correctness as a hypersensitivity that ends up resulting in people not being able to express their opinions at all without somebody suggesting they’re a victim...our social discourse and our political discourse becomes like walking on eggshells.”
Now the easy dismissal of Crenshaw's content would be- "Sorry, bro, we can't all be hardened, one-eyed Navy SEALS like you." And yes, that is accurate. But misses the point. His mental toughness is on a whole notha level of course. But that doesn't mean we trash the book and say forget it. Dismissal of information because we aren't like the information-giver is exhibit A of weak-mindedness.
We read the book and consider his points.
He says, "This book is about...the importance of building a society of iron-tough individuals who can think for themselves, take care of themselves, and recognize that a culture characterized by grit, discipline, and self-reliance is a culture that survives. A culture characterized by self-pity, indulgence, outrage, and resentment is a culture that falls apart."
I especially emphasize the positives of thinking for ourselves and taking responsibility, and the negatives of indulgence and resentment. If you don't see the value in the first two and the poison in the last two, then you're going to need a lot more than this book to explain the reality of the world to you.
What I love about Crenshaw's writing (and his temperament as a politician) is that it is calm, rational, and transparent. Yes, you will have a very clear indication of his political views while reading this book (more on that later), but most of what he imparts is universally helpful and important.
He begins the book by talking about the elephant in the room- what happened to his eye? He follows that up with chapters of advice, paired with illustrations from his personal life and SEAL training. In short: emulating proper 'hero' characteristics, thinking before reacting emotionally, not letting anger about little things build up to burst, feeling shame when we make bad choices, challenging ourselves to produce endurance and perseverance, being detail-oriented by asking questions and seeking underlying meanings, and framing our suffering with the right perspective that allows us to overcome adversity instead of wallow in it.
So much of what he talked about resonated with what I feel when I turn on the TV and scroll through my newsfeed. There is, indeed, much outrage, and I truly think if more people exercised the things he suggests, our culture would look a lot different. People would be stronger and happier.
His point that passion is overriding accomplishment really struck me. Meaning- those who are loudest or angriest (passionate) get the most attention and "moral high ground" instead of those who are actually achieving something. His case in point was Greta Thunberg vs Boyan Slat. Everyone knows Greta- the angry Swedish girl who yells at the world about the environment. But no one knows Boyan Slat- the Dutch boy who invented a solution to help clean up ocean pollution. Greta was Time's person of the year and she offered no real solutions; Boyan actually DID something instead of SAID something and there is no global recognition. We are glorifying and drawing attention to outrage instead of accomplishment.
Crenshaw quotes: "Thomas Sowell, the preeminent economist and social theorist, put it in stark terms. 'One of the sad signs of our times,' he wrote, 'is that we have demonized those who produce, subsidized those who refuse to produce, and canonized those who complain.'"
He challenges to change your perspective- you are not a product of your circumstances, you are an overcomer of your circumstances. Don't offend and be hard to offend.
I also found his observations about 'pure freedom,' indulgence and lack of discipline very telling. Our culture is pushing an agenda of self-fulfillment in the sense that we should be able to do whatever we want, whenever we want. But this implies relative morality. Freedom detached from a standard of morality is chaos. How could we ever all agree on a moral code determined by humanity. We currently have the Constitution, though John Adams even said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” And moral relativism can so easily destroy a nation.
There has been increasing condemnation of America and its founding as a whole. I firmly believe there is corruption in our government. But I think it's ridiculous to entertain thoughts of getting rid of our government or suddenly throwing everything it has done in the past into the trash bin and assuming the worst about our country and its principles. Starting over would be insane.
"So what is the right story? Is it just blindly assuming that whatever our country does is inherently good and righteous? No, that isn’t what I am suggesting. Just because victimhood ideology is toxic does not mean we have never had victims. But we must tell the story of America in a way that squares our suffering and injustice within the American identity without holding it in contempt for that injustice... Our country’s hands are not clean, and we shouldn’t pretend they are. But the right story to tell is this: Our country has not always lived up to its ideals, but that does not make the ideals themselves wrong."
I think this book is entirely worth reading and is a very important and revealing critique of the outrage culture we are undeniably in right now. But "Fortitude" is not without its flaws. One thing I had issue with was the emphasis on self-reliance and shame. I am totally for personal responsibility and being a contributor to society, but we are fallible creatures. We can set our minds to accomplish all the things, but we will still let ourselves down. We can aspire and desire all we want but no good thing is done apart from God. Self-reliance in terms of functioning properly in a society is obviously important but in a more abstract sense in terms of 'fulfillment'- self-reliance can only go so far.
I am unsure about the status of Crenshaw's faith. He mentioned in his book that he "doesn't wear his faith on his sleeve" so I'm not sure what role it plays in his life, but I think the absence of God in this discussion is a pretty big missing piece. He does point out the value of religion and that it provides us with purpose, which every human being needs. But there is still danger to take the 'self-sufficient' mentality too far where we see no value in weakness and no need for God.
As Christians, we talk a lot about our own weakness. 2 Corinthians 12:9 says, "But he said to me, 'My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.' Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me." Eliminating weakness from our life isn't the main goal. The main goal is relying on One who is stronger than us. 1 Corinthians 1:27 says, "God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong."
Self-sufficiency blinds us to our desperate need of a Savior. No amount of resilience and mental toughness can save us from the reality of our own sin. Do I think Crenshaw wrote this book to convince people they don't need God? No, I realize this book was not intended to talk about fortitude specifically in relation to the Christian life. But I must point out that though I think his advice is valuable and should be heeded in terms of functioning in the world- we must be cautious not to expect it to carry us further than it can.
Let's circle back quickly to my earlier comment on his political views candidly written into this book. His last chapter is probably where it gets the most direct when referring to the Left vs the Right. Many reviewers are calling out a double standard that while he calls out downfalls on the Left, he doesn't point out the downfalls of (particularly) the Trump administration.
I will admit that at times, he directed more criticism at the left than the right. But let's look at a few facts Crenshaw provided: "Self-identified liberals outnumber conservatives in journalism by a ratio of thirteen to one. In 2016, 96% of the media's political donations went to Hillary Clinton. Only 9.2 percent of academic faculty members identify as conservative." Those are fairly significant stats to consider. The loudest narrative we are hearing comes from the media, pop culture, and academia. Which is majorly skewed to liberal politics. Though 'cancellation' seems indiscriminate, I think it would be hard to refute that most of the 'outrage' expressed is coming from more liberal sources. Show me research to the contrary and I'll look at it.
Were there things from the Trump Administration that deserve criticism? Yes. Really, he did not do much talking about Trump's presidency at all- good or bad. Does that discredit his entire book? Nope. And frankly, I'm tired of intelligent, researched, and straight up true things/people being dismissed because they voted or supported a particular candidate or a particular political party. It's illogical and a detriment to responsible political discourse. People who show outrage at this book, clearly didn't read it. You don't have to agree with all of it- I didn't. But if you have rejected the entirety of this book for no other reason than "He voted for Trump" I would venture to guess that emotions have supersede your ability to seek truth.
I'll leave you with some good quotes to give you more flavor of the book:
"Our tendency to react wildly to headlines, which are already largely crafted to elicit emotional responses rather than inform the public, is asphyxiating the deliberative system of government designed by our Founders. It has created a troubling new reality where even new or more complete sets of facts cannot sway opinions. I am not saying you have to change your opinion, but you should at least have a serious, honest, and coherent reason for why not. Reactive dismissal of new information is indicative of mental weakness. Absorbing new information honestly, even if you don’t ultimately change your mind, is a sign of fortitude."
"The extreme nature of the outrage mob, willing to pounce at even the slightest offense, devoid of any benefit of the doubt, has forced the shame response into extreme categories. Everyone has two options now: show deep shame, or show no shame. The middle option of showing a little amount of shame in proportion to the actual offense is hardly an option at all. There is simply no reward for it. No grace given, no outrage will subside."
"Victimhood culture seeks to alter the definition of injustice entirely, where all disparities become discrimination, even when the evidence suggests otherwise."
"Dropping weapons-grade accusations, like that of racism, Nazism, sexism, homophobia, without cause or evidence is a sign of weakness, not strength. It is reflective of a mind that refuses to engage itself critically, and instead reaches for insult and ad hominem attacks to shroud ignorance and policy illiteracy."
"Personal responsibility leads to empowerment, control, and ultimately success. A person who isn’t personally responsible—feels no shame for it—is by definition waiting for someone else to be responsible for them. This isn’t empowering. This is disempowering. Someone else has responsibility for you and therefore control over your destiny... It is the height of helplessness."
"I believe our modern-day outrage culture is partly due to a misunderstanding of what our duties and virtues are, where they came from, and why they are good. For the outraged, there are serious questions about whether or not many basic truths actually exist at all. The postmodernists driving this revolutionary thought question everything simply for the sake of questioning it...You have a cultural trend that seeks to tear down anything traditional simply because it is old."
"He doesn’t suffer in any real way—and he is outraged. His problems are small but his emotions are not—they are elevated, outsized, and shared across cyberspace. The loss of suffering, this perpetual quest to remove all obstacles and hardships from our paths, has allowed people to find grievance in the small things, or —worse for the mind and soul—find grievance in things they have no ability to change."
"People are told that they are powerless and oppressed, and there is a specific other group to blame for it... Your misfortune is not the fault of your own decisions, but a consequence of the “1 percent” who ensure the “system is rigged.” The phrase “check your privilege” becomes the favorite tactic used to discredit opponents and subvert real discourse...To be oppressed is good for your status, according to the new counterculture."
Here's the thing. The book is called 'Fortitude.' Fortitude means "strong-mindedness" and "resilience." So we must first ask: Is Dan Crenshaw qualified to talk to me about resilience? And the answer is a resounding yes. Politics aside, we learn that Crenshaw lost his mom to cancer when he was very young. He also went through the brutal training to become a Navy SEAL (part of it twice because he broke his leg). He was deployed in Afghanistan and was blown up by an IED. He lost an eye and endured a risky surgery and subsequent 6 weeks facedown recovery to save minimal vision in his other eye. And here he is: a member of the House of Representatives with a Master of Public Admin from Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.
So yeah. I think I'll listen to what he has to say about mental toughness and overcoming suffering.
The goal of his book is to instill resilience amidst an outrage culture. He is quick to clarify that there is indeed true injustice, wrongdoing, tragedy, and grief. There is a proper time to be outraged. What he is discussing in his book is an outrage that has been normalized that assumes the worst about people and glorifies victimhood. "It is about the hypersensitivity that has infected our society, where undesirable language is the equivalent of physical violence, where an old tweet or Facebook post can be grounds for ruination and public shame, and where an absence of reason or fact encourages public indictment, moral outrage, and mob rule. Outrage culture is the weaponization of emotion, and the elevation of emotion above reason."
I am onboard with this premise. Every day you see a headline reporting someone new being cancelled for "offensive" things. Groveling apologies ensue but are never enough for the mob. How did we get here? Life is now tedious, hoping we aren't the next ones called out for who knows what.
I agree with Barack Obama on this one. He says, “If you’re narrowly defining political correctness as a hypersensitivity that ends up resulting in people not being able to express their opinions at all without somebody suggesting they’re a victim...our social discourse and our political discourse becomes like walking on eggshells.”
Now the easy dismissal of Crenshaw's content would be- "Sorry, bro, we can't all be hardened, one-eyed Navy SEALS like you." And yes, that is accurate. But misses the point. His mental toughness is on a whole notha level of course. But that doesn't mean we trash the book and say forget it. Dismissal of information because we aren't like the information-giver is exhibit A of weak-mindedness.
We read the book and consider his points.
He says, "This book is about...the importance of building a society of iron-tough individuals who can think for themselves, take care of themselves, and recognize that a culture characterized by grit, discipline, and self-reliance is a culture that survives. A culture characterized by self-pity, indulgence, outrage, and resentment is a culture that falls apart."
I especially emphasize the positives of thinking for ourselves and taking responsibility, and the negatives of indulgence and resentment. If you don't see the value in the first two and the poison in the last two, then you're going to need a lot more than this book to explain the reality of the world to you.
What I love about Crenshaw's writing (and his temperament as a politician) is that it is calm, rational, and transparent. Yes, you will have a very clear indication of his political views while reading this book (more on that later), but most of what he imparts is universally helpful and important.
He begins the book by talking about the elephant in the room- what happened to his eye? He follows that up with chapters of advice, paired with illustrations from his personal life and SEAL training. In short: emulating proper 'hero' characteristics, thinking before reacting emotionally, not letting anger about little things build up to burst, feeling shame when we make bad choices, challenging ourselves to produce endurance and perseverance, being detail-oriented by asking questions and seeking underlying meanings, and framing our suffering with the right perspective that allows us to overcome adversity instead of wallow in it.
So much of what he talked about resonated with what I feel when I turn on the TV and scroll through my newsfeed. There is, indeed, much outrage, and I truly think if more people exercised the things he suggests, our culture would look a lot different. People would be stronger and happier.
His point that passion is overriding accomplishment really struck me. Meaning- those who are loudest or angriest (passionate) get the most attention and "moral high ground" instead of those who are actually achieving something. His case in point was Greta Thunberg vs Boyan Slat. Everyone knows Greta- the angry Swedish girl who yells at the world about the environment. But no one knows Boyan Slat- the Dutch boy who invented a solution to help clean up ocean pollution. Greta was Time's person of the year and she offered no real solutions; Boyan actually DID something instead of SAID something and there is no global recognition. We are glorifying and drawing attention to outrage instead of accomplishment.
Crenshaw quotes: "Thomas Sowell, the preeminent economist and social theorist, put it in stark terms. 'One of the sad signs of our times,' he wrote, 'is that we have demonized those who produce, subsidized those who refuse to produce, and canonized those who complain.'"
He challenges to change your perspective- you are not a product of your circumstances, you are an overcomer of your circumstances. Don't offend and be hard to offend.
I also found his observations about 'pure freedom,' indulgence and lack of discipline very telling. Our culture is pushing an agenda of self-fulfillment in the sense that we should be able to do whatever we want, whenever we want. But this implies relative morality. Freedom detached from a standard of morality is chaos. How could we ever all agree on a moral code determined by humanity. We currently have the Constitution, though John Adams even said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” And moral relativism can so easily destroy a nation.
There has been increasing condemnation of America and its founding as a whole. I firmly believe there is corruption in our government. But I think it's ridiculous to entertain thoughts of getting rid of our government or suddenly throwing everything it has done in the past into the trash bin and assuming the worst about our country and its principles. Starting over would be insane.
"So what is the right story? Is it just blindly assuming that whatever our country does is inherently good and righteous? No, that isn’t what I am suggesting. Just because victimhood ideology is toxic does not mean we have never had victims. But we must tell the story of America in a way that squares our suffering and injustice within the American identity without holding it in contempt for that injustice... Our country’s hands are not clean, and we shouldn’t pretend they are. But the right story to tell is this: Our country has not always lived up to its ideals, but that does not make the ideals themselves wrong."
I think this book is entirely worth reading and is a very important and revealing critique of the outrage culture we are undeniably in right now. But "Fortitude" is not without its flaws. One thing I had issue with was the emphasis on self-reliance and shame. I am totally for personal responsibility and being a contributor to society, but we are fallible creatures. We can set our minds to accomplish all the things, but we will still let ourselves down. We can aspire and desire all we want but no good thing is done apart from God. Self-reliance in terms of functioning properly in a society is obviously important but in a more abstract sense in terms of 'fulfillment'- self-reliance can only go so far.
I am unsure about the status of Crenshaw's faith. He mentioned in his book that he "doesn't wear his faith on his sleeve" so I'm not sure what role it plays in his life, but I think the absence of God in this discussion is a pretty big missing piece. He does point out the value of religion and that it provides us with purpose, which every human being needs. But there is still danger to take the 'self-sufficient' mentality too far where we see no value in weakness and no need for God.
As Christians, we talk a lot about our own weakness. 2 Corinthians 12:9 says, "But he said to me, 'My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.' Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me." Eliminating weakness from our life isn't the main goal. The main goal is relying on One who is stronger than us. 1 Corinthians 1:27 says, "God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong."
Self-sufficiency blinds us to our desperate need of a Savior. No amount of resilience and mental toughness can save us from the reality of our own sin. Do I think Crenshaw wrote this book to convince people they don't need God? No, I realize this book was not intended to talk about fortitude specifically in relation to the Christian life. But I must point out that though I think his advice is valuable and should be heeded in terms of functioning in the world- we must be cautious not to expect it to carry us further than it can.
Let's circle back quickly to my earlier comment on his political views candidly written into this book. His last chapter is probably where it gets the most direct when referring to the Left vs the Right. Many reviewers are calling out a double standard that while he calls out downfalls on the Left, he doesn't point out the downfalls of (particularly) the Trump administration.
I will admit that at times, he directed more criticism at the left than the right. But let's look at a few facts Crenshaw provided: "Self-identified liberals outnumber conservatives in journalism by a ratio of thirteen to one. In 2016, 96% of the media's political donations went to Hillary Clinton. Only 9.2 percent of academic faculty members identify as conservative." Those are fairly significant stats to consider. The loudest narrative we are hearing comes from the media, pop culture, and academia. Which is majorly skewed to liberal politics. Though 'cancellation' seems indiscriminate, I think it would be hard to refute that most of the 'outrage' expressed is coming from more liberal sources. Show me research to the contrary and I'll look at it.
Were there things from the Trump Administration that deserve criticism? Yes. Really, he did not do much talking about Trump's presidency at all- good or bad. Does that discredit his entire book? Nope. And frankly, I'm tired of intelligent, researched, and straight up true things/people being dismissed because they voted or supported a particular candidate or a particular political party. It's illogical and a detriment to responsible political discourse. People who show outrage at this book, clearly didn't read it. You don't have to agree with all of it- I didn't. But if you have rejected the entirety of this book for no other reason than "He voted for Trump" I would venture to guess that emotions have supersede your ability to seek truth.
I'll leave you with some good quotes to give you more flavor of the book:
"Our tendency to react wildly to headlines, which are already largely crafted to elicit emotional responses rather than inform the public, is asphyxiating the deliberative system of government designed by our Founders. It has created a troubling new reality where even new or more complete sets of facts cannot sway opinions. I am not saying you have to change your opinion, but you should at least have a serious, honest, and coherent reason for why not. Reactive dismissal of new information is indicative of mental weakness. Absorbing new information honestly, even if you don’t ultimately change your mind, is a sign of fortitude."
"The extreme nature of the outrage mob, willing to pounce at even the slightest offense, devoid of any benefit of the doubt, has forced the shame response into extreme categories. Everyone has two options now: show deep shame, or show no shame. The middle option of showing a little amount of shame in proportion to the actual offense is hardly an option at all. There is simply no reward for it. No grace given, no outrage will subside."
"Victimhood culture seeks to alter the definition of injustice entirely, where all disparities become discrimination, even when the evidence suggests otherwise."
"Dropping weapons-grade accusations, like that of racism, Nazism, sexism, homophobia, without cause or evidence is a sign of weakness, not strength. It is reflective of a mind that refuses to engage itself critically, and instead reaches for insult and ad hominem attacks to shroud ignorance and policy illiteracy."
"Personal responsibility leads to empowerment, control, and ultimately success. A person who isn’t personally responsible—feels no shame for it—is by definition waiting for someone else to be responsible for them. This isn’t empowering. This is disempowering. Someone else has responsibility for you and therefore control over your destiny... It is the height of helplessness."
"I believe our modern-day outrage culture is partly due to a misunderstanding of what our duties and virtues are, where they came from, and why they are good. For the outraged, there are serious questions about whether or not many basic truths actually exist at all. The postmodernists driving this revolutionary thought question everything simply for the sake of questioning it...You have a cultural trend that seeks to tear down anything traditional simply because it is old."
"He doesn’t suffer in any real way—and he is outraged. His problems are small but his emotions are not—they are elevated, outsized, and shared across cyberspace. The loss of suffering, this perpetual quest to remove all obstacles and hardships from our paths, has allowed people to find grievance in the small things, or —worse for the mind and soul—find grievance in things they have no ability to change."
"People are told that they are powerless and oppressed, and there is a specific other group to blame for it... Your misfortune is not the fault of your own decisions, but a consequence of the “1 percent” who ensure the “system is rigged.” The phrase “check your privilege” becomes the favorite tactic used to discredit opponents and subvert real discourse...To be oppressed is good for your status, according to the new counterculture."
I read these books back in 2016, but the first movie (I’m assuming they’ll make more…?) just came out so I’m revamping my review since my original review on Goodreads was only a couple sentences! (Movie comparison at the end.)
The premise: Todd is the youngest male in an all-male village, Prentisstown, where everyone can hear everyone’s thoughts (pretty interesting plot point). But something is amiss. Where are all the women? When he is nearing his coming of age ritual, becoming more and more cognizant of something awry, his guardians help him escape. This triggers an aggressive game of cat and mouse. When he stumbles across a girl, Viola, and she has no discernible thoughts, Todd is off on an intense, heart-wrenching, journey of escape and discovery- both the existential and exploratory kinds.
This series is one where you become very invested in the story. It’s one I hated and I loved. My memory of specifics in each book is foggy, but I remember being somewhat relieved when it was over because I would get anxiety from my readings. The constant intensity is a bit exhausting. I suppose that kind of emotional investment is a marker of good writing.
The writing style of the book is very unique. At times there are words smattered on the pages in all size of fonts, overlapping each other creating a mess but delivering a message. It captures the chaos of audible thoughts, the struggle of trying to hide what you’re thinking- whether for vanity or safety-and the immaturity of the main character, Todd. His voice is childish, wandering, wondering, and transparent. Which makes the things he goes through that much more gripping, authentic, and suspenseful. (Disclaimer: including some swearing, not my preference, but feels less offensive in this series than other books for some reason)
This is not a pretty story all tied together with a bow. I mean, if Patrick Ness is willing to kill off Todd’s dog (his best friend) in the very first book then there are no lengths he will not go. I’ve read plenty of books where the main character is matched against his opponent and they go back and forth until someone finally ‘wins.’ But typically you have a sense of ‘they’re no match for our hero!’ and your overall demeanor is one of anticipation, triumph, and vindication. You won’t find that here.
This is a story where Todd seems far out-matched. Every time hope crests, it comes crashing down again. The bad guys are dark and evil and you wonder how he will ever survive. How can good ever triumph here? IsTodd, the picture of innocence, corruptible?
You’ll have to read it for yourself to find out if Ness offers enough hope at the end to be satisfactory.
Besides an emotionally hijacking suspense story, this book also offers conversation on race, sex (gender), humanity, manipulation, and colonization in a futuristic but yet archaic setting. I feel this series is like nothing you’ve ever read before, but only you can determine if you’re up for it.
**As to the movie:**
It was quite different. The credits said Patrick Ness helped write the screenplay but I’m wondering why he diverged from the storyline so much. For example, Viola’s ship with the next wave of colonists doesn’t come into play until the end of the series, but the movie is portraying it docking before anything remotely similar to book two happens.
I don’t want to give too many spoilers so I won’t discuss all the differences in the plot. It took forever for them to finally release the movie and with all the production struggles, I’m wondering if they will even be able to manage a sequel of any kind. If no follow-up comes to fruition, it makes this first movie a lot worse because of the things left out and the way it ended.
My husband never read the books, but he thought the movie was pretty good. So there’s that… Books are usually better than the movies anyway, but if you’re debating between reading the books or watching the movies, you might have to do both (read first) because the movie will take you on a different journey.
The premise: Todd is the youngest male in an all-male village, Prentisstown, where everyone can hear everyone’s thoughts (pretty interesting plot point). But something is amiss. Where are all the women? When he is nearing his coming of age ritual, becoming more and more cognizant of something awry, his guardians help him escape. This triggers an aggressive game of cat and mouse. When he stumbles across a girl, Viola, and she has no discernible thoughts, Todd is off on an intense, heart-wrenching, journey of escape and discovery- both the existential and exploratory kinds.
This series is one where you become very invested in the story. It’s one I hated and I loved. My memory of specifics in each book is foggy, but I remember being somewhat relieved when it was over because I would get anxiety from my readings. The constant intensity is a bit exhausting. I suppose that kind of emotional investment is a marker of good writing.
The writing style of the book is very unique. At times there are words smattered on the pages in all size of fonts, overlapping each other creating a mess but delivering a message. It captures the chaos of audible thoughts, the struggle of trying to hide what you’re thinking- whether for vanity or safety-and the immaturity of the main character, Todd. His voice is childish, wandering, wondering, and transparent. Which makes the things he goes through that much more gripping, authentic, and suspenseful. (Disclaimer: including some swearing, not my preference, but feels less offensive in this series than other books for some reason)
This is not a pretty story all tied together with a bow. I mean, if Patrick Ness is willing to kill off Todd’s dog (his best friend) in the very first book then there are no lengths he will not go. I’ve read plenty of books where the main character is matched against his opponent and they go back and forth until someone finally ‘wins.’ But typically you have a sense of ‘they’re no match for our hero!’ and your overall demeanor is one of anticipation, triumph, and vindication. You won’t find that here.
This is a story where Todd seems far out-matched. Every time hope crests, it comes crashing down again. The bad guys are dark and evil and you wonder how he will ever survive. How can good ever triumph here? IsTodd, the picture of innocence, corruptible?
You’ll have to read it for yourself to find out if Ness offers enough hope at the end to be satisfactory.
Besides an emotionally hijacking suspense story, this book also offers conversation on race, sex (gender), humanity, manipulation, and colonization in a futuristic but yet archaic setting. I feel this series is like nothing you’ve ever read before, but only you can determine if you’re up for it.
**As to the movie:**
It was quite different. The credits said Patrick Ness helped write the screenplay but I’m wondering why he diverged from the storyline so much. For example, Viola’s ship with the next wave of colonists doesn’t come into play until the end of the series, but the movie is portraying it docking before anything remotely similar to book two happens.
I don’t want to give too many spoilers so I won’t discuss all the differences in the plot. It took forever for them to finally release the movie and with all the production struggles, I’m wondering if they will even be able to manage a sequel of any kind. If no follow-up comes to fruition, it makes this first movie a lot worse because of the things left out and the way it ended.
My husband never read the books, but he thought the movie was pretty good. So there’s that… Books are usually better than the movies anyway, but if you’re debating between reading the books or watching the movies, you might have to do both (read first) because the movie will take you on a different journey.