Take a photo of a barcode or cover
shelfreflectionofficial's Reviews (844)
“People love to have lived a great story, but few people like the work it takes to make it happen.”
If I were going to summarize the book in one quote, there ya go. In short, it’s a book that explores what it takes to make a good story and challenges you to reflect on your ‘own story’. It attempts to remind us all that our lives are meaningful and should be lived that way; that sacrifice trumps comfort. However, he essentially leaves out the ‘ why life is meaningful’ part (perhaps intentionally?)
Donald Miller wrote Blue Like Jazz, then made it into a movie, and then wrote a book about how he made his book into a movie. (Basically.) I purposely did not read Blue Like Jazz. And after seeing that one of the blurbs on the back of this book came from Rob Bell, I admit I came into this book assuming I’d be reading heresy.
So now, after having read it, struggling to keep my preconceived ideas hidden away, here are my reflections.
Partway through the book I wondered if Don’s oft-referred friend Bob was Bob Goff. We find out, yes, it is indeed the case. And that presented an entirely new lens to see this book. Because I read Bob’s book ‘Everybody Always.’ And these too books read very similarly: Both books are compelling you to live more purposefully. Both authors are pretty good, funny storytellers. Both include remarks that seem rather pointless (in this book it was a lot of conversations he had with his friends, and all the times they were smoking pipes). They also both like to speculate about what God thinks, feels, or says.
I’m still processing how to feel about this book. I can’t really criticize the author for failing at something they never set out to do. Without knowing exactly his goal for this book, I apologetically may end up doing that, but I press on.
I like this book better than ‘Everybody Always’ partly because Don’s life is more relatable and his ‘conceptions’ seem more attainable. If we really wanted to, we could hike the Inca trail or bike across America. We can’t fly our children to 29 countries and interview world leaders or build a mansion-lodge in the Canadian wilderness that we have to own a plane to get to. I think his analogies to story-writing are compelling in application. Everyone reads books and watches movies. We are created in the image of the Creator so ‘creating’ our own stories makes sense to us. But I think Miller is still confused on his own thesis:
On the one hand he says, “It makes me wonder if that was the intention for man, to chase sticks and ducks, to name animals, to create families, and to keep looking back at God to feed off his pleasure at our pleasure… it’s as though God is saying, ‘Write a good story, take somebody with you, let me help.’”
On the other hand he says, “Job understood the story was not about him, and he cared more about the story than he did about himself. He said to me I was a tree in a story about a forest, and that it was arrogant of me to believe differently. And he told me the story of the forest is better than the story of the tree.”
On one hand he says “[in heaven] I’ll sit with God and we’ll remember my story together and then he’ll stand and put his arms around me and say, ‘Well done,’ and that he liked my story. And my soul won’t be thirsty anymore.”
On the other hand he says, “I told God no again, but he came back to me and asked me if I really believed he could write a better story—and if I did, why didn’t I trust him?”
So which is it? Is it God’s story, or is it ours? Does God only care that we find pleasure in our own stories? Or are we called to something greater than pleasure? If Don just means to remind us that we have a responsibility to take action and live meaningful lives on purpose, to live a life worthy of the Lord, then that’s great, I have no issue. But, like Bob, he is careless with his words and presents something that could easily be perceived and acted upon in the opposite way.
I can’t help but think of these words from the book ‘You Who?’ by Rachel Jankovic: “If we try to write our stories like the world does, composing our little plot points and shaping ourselves into what we think it would be neat to be, but we love Jesus, this is just making him one more interesting plot point about us. We put our bumper sticker that says “Jesus – lover “on our little lifestyle car... But Christ will not be managed or contained like that. If he truly bought you with his blood, he did not do so in order to get a sponsorship position in your life. He’s not here to look good next your brand. He bought your life, and you are his.”
and
“It doesn’t matter how long or thoughtful or detailed the story you were writing is. If it is written by a character in the story rather than the Author of the story, it can only ever be tiny; it will always be minuscule by comparison. You cannot, as a character, out-write the Author of you.”
and
“When we tell each other over and over that whatever we do is precious and wonderful and glorious because God loves us, we demonstrate how little we understand ourselves and our Creator.… Jesus Christ came to this earth, struggled, suffered, and died so that you might die… Jesus Christ died so that you might die, and he lives so that you might live… There will be no resolution to the struggles in your life if you do not willingly give your self-fashioned identity to Christ that it might die…There is no hope for you that is not Jesus. There’s nothing interesting about you if it is not resurrected in him. There’s nothing defining about you that cannot live in Christ. Your selfishness is dead. Your lust is dead. Your need to be unique is dead. Your envy, greed, obsessions, guilts– they are all dead. Dead and gone in Christ. Stop trying to tidy them up and make them mean something, because they never will.”
Because THAT’S what our story is. And again, whether intentional or not, Don is writing with a very strong ‘God is my sponsorship’ kind of vibe instead of ‘we need to die to ourselves and live for the glory of God because Jesus’s death and resurrection is my life’ kind of vibe. God doesn’t say ‘well-done’ because we write good stories and live happy lives. He says ‘well-done my good and faithful servant’-because we are faithful to his truth and obedient to his Word.
I get that Don specializes in memoir writing. And who am I to judge his story and his feelings and his spiritual journey? And that is true. The subtitle of this book is ‘What I learned while editing my life.’ He’s sharing what he discovered. But it’s naïve to think that is the only goal of his book. He wants to spur others on to find meaning in their lives as well. And if he’s not leading people to where there is ACTUAL meaning, then that’s not very helpful or hopeful. He seems to be content writing to the broader audience of those who may believe in God and those who just believe in a voice or a force outside themselves. But a meaningful life on earth is actually meaningless if it’s not lived in anticipation of eternity.
That leaves me with a 3-star rating. Because he presented a practical, relatable, important challenge to spur others on to good deeds and purpose, creatively and accessibly comparing it to movie-making. And there are good things to glean from these pages. But in the end, the message was blurred with ambiguity and the potential to turn significance into illusion if we get these questions wrong- who are we living for and why do our lives have meaning?
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
If I were going to summarize the book in one quote, there ya go. In short, it’s a book that explores what it takes to make a good story and challenges you to reflect on your ‘own story’. It attempts to remind us all that our lives are meaningful and should be lived that way; that sacrifice trumps comfort. However, he essentially leaves out the ‘ why life is meaningful’ part (perhaps intentionally?)
Donald Miller wrote Blue Like Jazz, then made it into a movie, and then wrote a book about how he made his book into a movie. (Basically.) I purposely did not read Blue Like Jazz. And after seeing that one of the blurbs on the back of this book came from Rob Bell, I admit I came into this book assuming I’d be reading heresy.
So now, after having read it, struggling to keep my preconceived ideas hidden away, here are my reflections.
Partway through the book I wondered if Don’s oft-referred friend Bob was Bob Goff. We find out, yes, it is indeed the case. And that presented an entirely new lens to see this book. Because I read Bob’s book ‘Everybody Always.’ And these too books read very similarly: Both books are compelling you to live more purposefully. Both authors are pretty good, funny storytellers. Both include remarks that seem rather pointless (in this book it was a lot of conversations he had with his friends, and all the times they were smoking pipes). They also both like to speculate about what God thinks, feels, or says.
I’m still processing how to feel about this book. I can’t really criticize the author for failing at something they never set out to do. Without knowing exactly his goal for this book, I apologetically may end up doing that, but I press on.
I like this book better than ‘Everybody Always’ partly because Don’s life is more relatable and his ‘conceptions’ seem more attainable. If we really wanted to, we could hike the Inca trail or bike across America. We can’t fly our children to 29 countries and interview world leaders or build a mansion-lodge in the Canadian wilderness that we have to own a plane to get to. I think his analogies to story-writing are compelling in application. Everyone reads books and watches movies. We are created in the image of the Creator so ‘creating’ our own stories makes sense to us. But I think Miller is still confused on his own thesis:
On the one hand he says, “It makes me wonder if that was the intention for man, to chase sticks and ducks, to name animals, to create families, and to keep looking back at God to feed off his pleasure at our pleasure… it’s as though God is saying, ‘Write a good story, take somebody with you, let me help.’”
On the other hand he says, “Job understood the story was not about him, and he cared more about the story than he did about himself. He said to me I was a tree in a story about a forest, and that it was arrogant of me to believe differently. And he told me the story of the forest is better than the story of the tree.”
On one hand he says “[in heaven] I’ll sit with God and we’ll remember my story together and then he’ll stand and put his arms around me and say, ‘Well done,’ and that he liked my story. And my soul won’t be thirsty anymore.”
On the other hand he says, “I told God no again, but he came back to me and asked me if I really believed he could write a better story—and if I did, why didn’t I trust him?”
So which is it? Is it God’s story, or is it ours? Does God only care that we find pleasure in our own stories? Or are we called to something greater than pleasure? If Don just means to remind us that we have a responsibility to take action and live meaningful lives on purpose, to live a life worthy of the Lord, then that’s great, I have no issue. But, like Bob, he is careless with his words and presents something that could easily be perceived and acted upon in the opposite way.
I can’t help but think of these words from the book ‘You Who?’ by Rachel Jankovic: “If we try to write our stories like the world does, composing our little plot points and shaping ourselves into what we think it would be neat to be, but we love Jesus, this is just making him one more interesting plot point about us. We put our bumper sticker that says “Jesus – lover “on our little lifestyle car... But Christ will not be managed or contained like that. If he truly bought you with his blood, he did not do so in order to get a sponsorship position in your life. He’s not here to look good next your brand. He bought your life, and you are his.”
and
“It doesn’t matter how long or thoughtful or detailed the story you were writing is. If it is written by a character in the story rather than the Author of the story, it can only ever be tiny; it will always be minuscule by comparison. You cannot, as a character, out-write the Author of you.”
and
“When we tell each other over and over that whatever we do is precious and wonderful and glorious because God loves us, we demonstrate how little we understand ourselves and our Creator.… Jesus Christ came to this earth, struggled, suffered, and died so that you might die… Jesus Christ died so that you might die, and he lives so that you might live… There will be no resolution to the struggles in your life if you do not willingly give your self-fashioned identity to Christ that it might die…There is no hope for you that is not Jesus. There’s nothing interesting about you if it is not resurrected in him. There’s nothing defining about you that cannot live in Christ. Your selfishness is dead. Your lust is dead. Your need to be unique is dead. Your envy, greed, obsessions, guilts– they are all dead. Dead and gone in Christ. Stop trying to tidy them up and make them mean something, because they never will.”
Because THAT’S what our story is. And again, whether intentional or not, Don is writing with a very strong ‘God is my sponsorship’ kind of vibe instead of ‘we need to die to ourselves and live for the glory of God because Jesus’s death and resurrection is my life’ kind of vibe. God doesn’t say ‘well-done’ because we write good stories and live happy lives. He says ‘well-done my good and faithful servant’-because we are faithful to his truth and obedient to his Word.
I get that Don specializes in memoir writing. And who am I to judge his story and his feelings and his spiritual journey? And that is true. The subtitle of this book is ‘What I learned while editing my life.’ He’s sharing what he discovered. But it’s naïve to think that is the only goal of his book. He wants to spur others on to find meaning in their lives as well. And if he’s not leading people to where there is ACTUAL meaning, then that’s not very helpful or hopeful. He seems to be content writing to the broader audience of those who may believe in God and those who just believe in a voice or a force outside themselves. But a meaningful life on earth is actually meaningless if it’s not lived in anticipation of eternity.
That leaves me with a 3-star rating. Because he presented a practical, relatable, important challenge to spur others on to good deeds and purpose, creatively and accessibly comparing it to movie-making. And there are good things to glean from these pages. But in the end, the message was blurred with ambiguity and the potential to turn significance into illusion if we get these questions wrong- who are we living for and why do our lives have meaning?
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
This is an excellent and important read for Christians on suffering and evil. Carson is quick to point out that this book is not necessarily written for unbelievers and that it is also not necessarily written for those who are currently going through a time of pain or suffering. This book was recommended to me with that in mind and so I had waited until my season of pain was over, and I agree that that is appropriate caution to take. Another important takeaway is that Carson does not claim to have all the answers. There are things that the Bible doesn't explain to us- i.e. a lot of the 'how's'- and God has chosen to not reveal all of his mysteries. So yes, this book will not answer every single one of your questions or objections to your liking, but living in faith and trusting God with those things is not a bad place to be.
Carson's goal in this book is to provide Christians with foundational thoughts on evil and suffering so that when we come to times of pain that we can remember these truths and filter our circumstances in light of what the Bible teaches and in light of who God is. If we have a right view of God and if we always see suffering in light of the cross, then we can suffer well. It doesn't mean we won't feel pain or that we won't grieve, but we can't get those two things wrong.
He rightly discusses the different kinds of suffering- not all suffering is equal and is not all effects of the same cause. It is necessary to view each person's suffering on a case by case instead of making any sort of sweeping judgments on certain types of suffering- rape, abuse, illness, war, poverty, natural disasters, hell, etc. And in every scenario he addresses, he provides ample Biblical support.
As others have commented in reviews, his chapter on Job is especially helpful- Job has done nothing to 'deserve' the suffering he endures, and in the end God does not give him the 'answers' Job is looking for. And that is most commonly where we think we find ourselves in our seasons of pain. Carson's dissection of Job's response, in conjunction with the rest of the book, give us a good point of reference and place to know how we should also respond to God.
I also appreciated his chapter on providence. I have recently done much study on compatibilism and struggling with what to do with the tension of God's sovereignty and human responsibility and feel that Carson does an excellent job of explaining what the Bible teaches- as well as where the mysteries lie.
Here are a few (of the vast amount) of quotes I found helpful:
"However hard some things are to understand, it is never helpful to start picking and choosing biblical truths we find congenial, as if the Bible is an open-shelved supermarket where we are at perfect liberty to choose only the chocolate bars. For the Christian, it is God’s Word, and it is not negotiable. What answers we find may not be exhaustive, but they give us the God who is there, and who gives us some measure of comfort and assurance. The alternative is a god we manufacture, and who provides no comfort at all. Whatever comfort we feel is self -delusion, and it will be stripped away at the end when we give an account to the God who has spoken to us, not only in Scripture, but supremely in his Son Jesus Christ."
"We have learned to live with irony and paradox, because we have come to see that, for the cross to make any sense at all, we simply must affirm that God was sovereign, that human beings were rebellious and morally responsible, that God’s love and justice were displayed, and that Christ died voluntarily. If we forsake any one of these truths, the significance of the cross is destroyed and we are lost."
"By being too protective of God, we are in fact building a grid out of only a subset of the biblical materials, and filtering out some of what is revealed in the Bible about the God who has graciously disclosed himself. The result, rather sadly, is a god who is either less than sovereign or less than personal, either incompetent and frustrated or impassive and stoical. But the God and Father is our Lord Jesus Christ is utterly transcendent and passionately personal. These are among the ‘givens’ of Scripture, and we sacrifice them to our peril. "
"When we suffer, there will sometimes be mystery. Will there also be faith?"
"When Christians think seriously about evil and suffering, one of the paramount reasons we are so sure that God is to be trusted is because he sent his Son to suffer cruelly on our behalf...The God on whom we rely knows what suffering is all about, not merely in the way that God knows everything, but by experience. "
"Pain tends to make people better, or bitter. If we find it is developing in us a pattern of bitterness, we are in desperate straits. And one of the first steps to reverse such bitterness is to come before the Lord, broken and confused and hurt as we may be, and read his Word, seek his face, and ask him to provide the comfort that only he can. For in a fallen world, pain and suffering can be God’s megaphone, to an individual or to a nation, distracting our attention from the selfishness of a life that functionally disowns God, no matter what we say in our creeds."
Okay, I'll stop. But really, so much to be gleaned from this book.
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
Carson's goal in this book is to provide Christians with foundational thoughts on evil and suffering so that when we come to times of pain that we can remember these truths and filter our circumstances in light of what the Bible teaches and in light of who God is. If we have a right view of God and if we always see suffering in light of the cross, then we can suffer well. It doesn't mean we won't feel pain or that we won't grieve, but we can't get those two things wrong.
He rightly discusses the different kinds of suffering- not all suffering is equal and is not all effects of the same cause. It is necessary to view each person's suffering on a case by case instead of making any sort of sweeping judgments on certain types of suffering- rape, abuse, illness, war, poverty, natural disasters, hell, etc. And in every scenario he addresses, he provides ample Biblical support.
As others have commented in reviews, his chapter on Job is especially helpful- Job has done nothing to 'deserve' the suffering he endures, and in the end God does not give him the 'answers' Job is looking for. And that is most commonly where we think we find ourselves in our seasons of pain. Carson's dissection of Job's response, in conjunction with the rest of the book, give us a good point of reference and place to know how we should also respond to God.
I also appreciated his chapter on providence. I have recently done much study on compatibilism and struggling with what to do with the tension of God's sovereignty and human responsibility and feel that Carson does an excellent job of explaining what the Bible teaches- as well as where the mysteries lie.
Here are a few (of the vast amount) of quotes I found helpful:
"However hard some things are to understand, it is never helpful to start picking and choosing biblical truths we find congenial, as if the Bible is an open-shelved supermarket where we are at perfect liberty to choose only the chocolate bars. For the Christian, it is God’s Word, and it is not negotiable. What answers we find may not be exhaustive, but they give us the God who is there, and who gives us some measure of comfort and assurance. The alternative is a god we manufacture, and who provides no comfort at all. Whatever comfort we feel is self -delusion, and it will be stripped away at the end when we give an account to the God who has spoken to us, not only in Scripture, but supremely in his Son Jesus Christ."
"We have learned to live with irony and paradox, because we have come to see that, for the cross to make any sense at all, we simply must affirm that God was sovereign, that human beings were rebellious and morally responsible, that God’s love and justice were displayed, and that Christ died voluntarily. If we forsake any one of these truths, the significance of the cross is destroyed and we are lost."
"By being too protective of God, we are in fact building a grid out of only a subset of the biblical materials, and filtering out some of what is revealed in the Bible about the God who has graciously disclosed himself. The result, rather sadly, is a god who is either less than sovereign or less than personal, either incompetent and frustrated or impassive and stoical. But the God and Father is our Lord Jesus Christ is utterly transcendent and passionately personal. These are among the ‘givens’ of Scripture, and we sacrifice them to our peril. "
"When we suffer, there will sometimes be mystery. Will there also be faith?"
"When Christians think seriously about evil and suffering, one of the paramount reasons we are so sure that God is to be trusted is because he sent his Son to suffer cruelly on our behalf...The God on whom we rely knows what suffering is all about, not merely in the way that God knows everything, but by experience. "
"Pain tends to make people better, or bitter. If we find it is developing in us a pattern of bitterness, we are in desperate straits. And one of the first steps to reverse such bitterness is to come before the Lord, broken and confused and hurt as we may be, and read his Word, seek his face, and ask him to provide the comfort that only he can. For in a fallen world, pain and suffering can be God’s megaphone, to an individual or to a nation, distracting our attention from the selfishness of a life that functionally disowns God, no matter what we say in our creeds."
Okay, I'll stop. But really, so much to be gleaned from this book.
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
3.5 stars rounded up to 4 because I see potential in this series. I do like Tess Gerritsen's Rizzoli and Isles series and that's what drew me to try this out. It is a bit gruesome in medical detail (not violence). Google images of 'teratomas' and if you can handle those, then you'll be fine reading this. If not, you may want to pass on this or you can just skim over those pages.
I liked the relationship between Whit (reporter) and Riggs (medical examiner). We follow crimes from two different perspectives and ways of investigating. I wouldn't necessarily describe it as a 'non-stop thrill ride' as annotated on the cover, but it was a compelling journey to find the truth and the added reality of the teratomas was disgustingly interesting.
There were a few things I thought could have been different- the fact that Whit had two daughters was not very ingratiated in the story. I kept forgetting. I don't know if it was just because they weren't involved much or if it was a lack in character portrayal by the author in shaping how we viewed her as a person. I just didn't really see her as a mom and her daily routine didn't leave much room for family. Seeing as this is the beginning of a series, I can see how this is the set-up for future books and that we'll probably see more of her daughters later on. The author will have more space for deepening character visibility and development.
The second thing I thought was lacking was the 'solving' at the end. I think we got all the answers and explanations but some of them weren't very robust. The who was clear and part of the why, but the 'how' was a bit vague, and the jump between the killer/s 'vision' and the killing of all of the victims wasn't solidly laid out. I would have liked more information about that woven into the story (and not just added to the 'confessional' wrap-up as sometimes is done).
The last thing I'm wondering about is the title- I'm not sure exactly where this comes from. After reading it, I'm not sure what the desperate place is or who is in a desperate place. The photo indicates maybe they're referring to Whit's PTSD regarding forests but that's just a character detail not part of the plot or storyline. I think I would have come up with a different title. But that's just a personal preference *shrug*
Oh, wait, another teeny tiny little thing that doesn't really matter but I need to point out... She named a company that does stem cell research 'Human Resources' and later abbreviates it as HR in references. But considering virtually every company in existences has a human resources department, that's an odd and confusing choice for a company name right?? So you could say, 'I work in human resources at Human Resources.' I think we all see it...
ANYWAY, I think it's accurate to say that if you like Gerritsen, then you'll probably like this!
*Sidenote: The advanced digital copy I received and read had quite a few spelling and grammatical errors to my chagrin but I'm assuming it will go through another edit before publishing*
**I received an ARC via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review**
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
I liked the relationship between Whit (reporter) and Riggs (medical examiner). We follow crimes from two different perspectives and ways of investigating. I wouldn't necessarily describe it as a 'non-stop thrill ride' as annotated on the cover, but it was a compelling journey to find the truth and the added reality of the teratomas was disgustingly interesting.
There were a few things I thought could have been different- the fact that Whit had two daughters was not very ingratiated in the story. I kept forgetting. I don't know if it was just because they weren't involved much or if it was a lack in character portrayal by the author in shaping how we viewed her as a person. I just didn't really see her as a mom and her daily routine didn't leave much room for family. Seeing as this is the beginning of a series, I can see how this is the set-up for future books and that we'll probably see more of her daughters later on. The author will have more space for deepening character visibility and development.
The second thing I thought was lacking was the 'solving' at the end. I think we got all the answers and explanations but some of them weren't very robust. The who was clear and part of the why, but the 'how' was a bit vague, and the jump between the killer/s 'vision' and the killing of all of the victims wasn't solidly laid out. I would have liked more information about that woven into the story (and not just added to the 'confessional' wrap-up as sometimes is done).
The last thing I'm wondering about is the title- I'm not sure exactly where this comes from. After reading it, I'm not sure what the desperate place is or who is in a desperate place. The photo indicates maybe they're referring to Whit's PTSD regarding forests but that's just a character detail not part of the plot or storyline. I think I would have come up with a different title. But that's just a personal preference *shrug*
Oh, wait, another teeny tiny little thing that doesn't really matter but I need to point out... She named a company that does stem cell research 'Human Resources' and later abbreviates it as HR in references. But considering virtually every company in existences has a human resources department, that's an odd and confusing choice for a company name right?? So you could say, 'I work in human resources at Human Resources.' I think we all see it...
ANYWAY, I think it's accurate to say that if you like Gerritsen, then you'll probably like this!
*Sidenote: The advanced digital copy I received and read had quite a few spelling and grammatical errors to my chagrin but I'm assuming it will go through another edit before publishing*
**I received an ARC via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review**
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
A dynamic story of love imbued with the power of music. A beautiful harmony of love and pain with dangerous crescendos of suspense and sacrifice.
“Destruction is a music all its own. One composed of drumbeats and a percussion of passion and pain.”
Isda, trapped in a life of isolation as a disfigured, hunted gravoir. Emeric, alone on a quest to find his captured gravoir sister. Their paths cross in the halls of the opera house and their bond is forged through their music. But can their love survive the dangers of gravoir life or will the power Isda finds within herself keep them apart?
“If you aren’t in control of your emotions, you aren’t in control of anything.”
[Apparently this is a rendition of Phantom of the Opera- which I have never read/watched and therefore will make no comparison to]
The setting of this story has a dark, French, gothic vibe- Isda lives in a crypt under the opera house in a street lit with gaslights, stone streets trod by horses and carriages. The currency is elixir- the golden liquid responsible for storing the memories in one's mind (and is the artwork of this book cover). Elixir can only be extracted or tapped into while someone is singing. Fendoirs and gravoirs are the "villains" in this world- their faces disfigured from birth, they have the power to extract elixir and tamper with memories and thus are considered dangerous to society-- extract enough elixir and one can forget they have children, forget how to function, or be drained of life. Gravoirs have wreaked havoc before and they could do it again if given the chance.
“Because they fear us. Because we are powerful. Because we are meant to be their masters.”
Isda's storyline is one of a deep desire to be free. To experience life outside her prison of isolation. Emeric's storyline is one of courage and determination to rescue his sister and only surviving family member. Emeric's memories, which Isda can access with her powers offers her the answer to freedom. Unbeknownst to Isda, she may be the key to finding Emeric's sister. What starts out as a mutual, yet separate clandestine partnership turns into the truest bond either of them have ever known.
I loved their story. I loved their characters. I loved their flirty banter. I don't read very many romance novels, and usually YA love feels either shallow or over-the-top, but this one where I thought: "I just love them!" and it really drew me in. They needed each other in the perfect way and they were destined to be together. And then they face intense adversity and have to make really hard choices. And you turn the pages faster and faster because you just want to see them be okay and ride off into the sunset singing their beautiful duet.
And I won't tell you if they do or not.
I thought Olson did a phenomenal job writing this story, captivating the readers, and bringing her characters to life. Things I thought would be plot holes (except for one I'll put at the end) she acknowledges later in a way that makes sense. I love the connections between music, memories, power, and life. She truly created a magical story.
Also an interesting study in the concept that people can become what you call them, treat them, or expect them to be.
This was a spellbinding and heart-wrenching book. With love, danger, suspense, and just enough fantasy to keep it innovative, I highly recommend you read it.
“Midnight comes to life, my darling, To guard our memories... So meet me in the darkness, darling, Where past and present meet.”
[Side note: Most of my questions were answered, but my biggest question is this: If Cyril kept Isda hidden away since birth, how did he take care of her as a baby and toddler?? He couldn't just leave her in there by herself all night every night. That's a pretty big investment for the first several years to raise a non-traumatized isolated little individual. It really doesn't matter with this book but as a mother of 4 I can't stop imagining how that would have worked! Jessica Olson: please explain!]
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
“Destruction is a music all its own. One composed of drumbeats and a percussion of passion and pain.”
Isda, trapped in a life of isolation as a disfigured, hunted gravoir. Emeric, alone on a quest to find his captured gravoir sister. Their paths cross in the halls of the opera house and their bond is forged through their music. But can their love survive the dangers of gravoir life or will the power Isda finds within herself keep them apart?
“If you aren’t in control of your emotions, you aren’t in control of anything.”
[Apparently this is a rendition of Phantom of the Opera- which I have never read/watched and therefore will make no comparison to]
The setting of this story has a dark, French, gothic vibe- Isda lives in a crypt under the opera house in a street lit with gaslights, stone streets trod by horses and carriages. The currency is elixir- the golden liquid responsible for storing the memories in one's mind (and is the artwork of this book cover). Elixir can only be extracted or tapped into while someone is singing. Fendoirs and gravoirs are the "villains" in this world- their faces disfigured from birth, they have the power to extract elixir and tamper with memories and thus are considered dangerous to society-- extract enough elixir and one can forget they have children, forget how to function, or be drained of life. Gravoirs have wreaked havoc before and they could do it again if given the chance.
“Because they fear us. Because we are powerful. Because we are meant to be their masters.”
Isda's storyline is one of a deep desire to be free. To experience life outside her prison of isolation. Emeric's storyline is one of courage and determination to rescue his sister and only surviving family member. Emeric's memories, which Isda can access with her powers offers her the answer to freedom. Unbeknownst to Isda, she may be the key to finding Emeric's sister. What starts out as a mutual, yet separate clandestine partnership turns into the truest bond either of them have ever known.
I loved their story. I loved their characters. I loved their flirty banter. I don't read very many romance novels, and usually YA love feels either shallow or over-the-top, but this one where I thought: "I just love them!" and it really drew me in. They needed each other in the perfect way and they were destined to be together. And then they face intense adversity and have to make really hard choices. And you turn the pages faster and faster because you just want to see them be okay and ride off into the sunset singing their beautiful duet.
And I won't tell you if they do or not.
I thought Olson did a phenomenal job writing this story, captivating the readers, and bringing her characters to life. Things I thought would be plot holes (except for one I'll put at the end) she acknowledges later in a way that makes sense. I love the connections between music, memories, power, and life. She truly created a magical story.
Also an interesting study in the concept that people can become what you call them, treat them, or expect them to be.
This was a spellbinding and heart-wrenching book. With love, danger, suspense, and just enough fantasy to keep it innovative, I highly recommend you read it.
“Midnight comes to life, my darling, To guard our memories... So meet me in the darkness, darling, Where past and present meet.”
[Side note: Most of my questions were answered, but my biggest question is this: If Cyril kept Isda hidden away since birth, how did he take care of her as a baby and toddler?? He couldn't just leave her in there by herself all night every night. That's a pretty big investment for the first several years to raise a non-traumatized isolated little individual. It really doesn't matter with this book but as a mother of 4 I can't stop imagining how that would have worked! Jessica Olson: please explain!]
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
[Edited] "If you are looking for a book that will gently pet your bangs and soothe your worried brow, telling you how beautiful you are, this is not it." PREACH! So. refreshing. Finally someone who will say it like it is and stop catering to our feelings. If Rachel was sitting next to me while I read this book, she would have gotten a hundred enthusiastic high fives. I'm tired of the secular and Christian trend alike making less of obedience and more of 'adjusting' truth to fit what we FEEL is right and true to ourselves and what makes us important. 'Identity' and 'meaning' are synonyms, and the world is really screwing these up. This is a book that sets the record straight- the record according to the Author and Creator of all things, who else?
We are getting the answers wrong to life's basic questions: "Who are we? Who decides? What does it mean, and why does it matter anyway?" Rachel is quick to point out that unlike what the world tells us, we are not writing our own stories. When we attempt to 'create' ourselves, it's choosing to defy God and what he created us to do and be. What we try to craft for ourselves is not what gives us value or importance. Our identity and meaning is found in obedience to and worship of our Creator, allowing Him to shape us into who he wants us to be.
Throughout the book, Rachel addresses fallacies like 'You just need to believe in yourself' or 'Follow your heart.' That only you can decide things for your true self. That being 'a daughter of a King' is a concept of privilege. And the implications of self-rescue (leaving or getting rid of anything that separates you from your true self).
True, the theme of obedience feels repetitive. But repetitive in a good way. Because she is trying to shock us out of our 'I'm in control and I can do anything I want because God will always love me and his grace always abounds' lifestyle. God is love. And grace is real and bountiful. But Jesus exemplified more than love. He was the picture-perfect definition of obedience. Scripture is clear- obedience doesn't save us, but are we really saved if we don't desire righteousness?
Let's see... what else... In every chapter she points to Christ. Her chapter on body image is phenomenal. She emphasizes contentment and gratitude....
And she does not shy from the hard truths such as--
We need to DIE to ourselves:
"Stop trying to be true to yourselves, people! Hell is full of the true-to-self crowd! Be true to Christ! Let it all go! You are in good hands! It is far sweeter, more fun, and more interesting to die in Christ than to live to the self."
"We haven’t been called to ‘feel awesome about ourselves”, we have been called to faithfulness. We have been called to His purposes. The reality of following Christ is not that kind of cheap affirmation. It is not an emotional Snuggie for our cold hearts. It is a different thing altogether. It is a cross being carried."
We are NOT enough:
"You are free from worrying that you aren’t enough. You aren’t! None of us is! And that is good news. We weren’t made to be gods, we were made to be worshippers."
"The more like him we become, the more we become the person we were created to be. Instead of carrying a burden that focuses on knowledge of self, we shift the burden to knowledge of Christ. He is sufficient. I am not nor shall I ever be. He is faithful. He is perfect. He is capable. He is enough. And more than all these things together, the sweetest gift of all is that He has given himself to us."
"There is no hope for you that is not Jesus. There’s nothing interesting about you if it is not resurrected in him. There’s nothing defining about you that cannot live in Christ. Your selfishness is dead. Your lust is dead. Your need to be unique is dead. Your envy, greed, obsessions, guilts– they are all dead. Dead and gone in Christ. Stop trying to tidy them up and make them mean something, because they never will."
God doesn't love the selves we create:
"Christians who are struggling deeply with identity issues are getting so little help from other believers… We try to help them arrange their life and identity so they can still have whatever closely held things they have found in themselves (such as being same-sex attracted) and Jesus, too... more and more is being published by other struggling Christians on this topic, but it seems to be nothing more than a bunch of ideas for arranging things in your life so you can still think you qualify as a Christian...We Christians struggle to believe that Jesus could both love us and hate the identities we are fashioning. If he really loved us, he would be willing to be one of the presenting sponsors of whatever life we are busily creating for ourselves. he loves us, right? Aren’t we whatever we make ourselves? Doesn’t he love that?"
The organization of chapters weren't spot on, but the things she talks about do overlap a lot so I couldn't even propose a better plan.
I so appreciated this book in all its bluntness. In a culture of "tolerance" we've accepted a lot less than we are called to. Rachel slaps the blinders off our face and reminds us that history is His story, not ours. Let's stop living in our tiny 'Jesus-sponsored' worlds and Be. His. Entirely.
A few extra quotes for your reading pleasure: (or hello, just go read the whole book!)
"If we try to write our stories like the world does, composing our little plot points and shaping ourselves into what we think it would be neat to be, but we love Jesus, this is just making him one more interesting plot point about us. We put our bumper sticker that says “Jesus – lover “on our little lifestyle car... But Christ will not be managed or contained like that. If he truly bought you with his blood, he did not do so in order to get a sponsorship position in your life. He’s not here to look good next your brand. He bought your life, and you are his."
"We are told over and over and over that you must follow your heart. And what our society has reaped from that unerring pursuit has been exactly what you might expect: a lot of wildly undisciplined and confused people, anxiously following their own wildest ideas, doing every self-indulgent and ill-behaved thing they can think of."
"The world tells us with endless enthusiasm that we can work our way to a perfect state of accepting ourselves and loving ourselves. The goal, they say, is to be able to love what you see in the mirror.… But if we do get ourselves there, what earthly good will it actually do us?… No matter how many times you tell yourself you are fierce or looking hot, nothing will come of it. There’s no salvation, no freedom here... The Christian should have an entirely different set of goals and aspirations. To what end has our body been given to us? So that we might glorify God. Do you know something that glorifies God? Christians glorify God when they are able to look in the mirror at their bodies – with all their faults and flaws and foibles – and truly love the One who gave it to them. That is the measure of a healthy body image."
"We do not continue to evaluate what the apple is doing for us once it is out of sight...This is the kind of simple joy we need to have in coming to the Word... Sometimes you won’t understand what you read, but eat it anyway in joy and gratitude, and it will change you anyway. The very act of eating the Word of God is an act of defining obedience. The Word is alive, and it knows what to do with you even when you don’t know what to do with it. (Heb 4:12)"
[Edit: I have now finished 'Girl, Wash Your Face.' (meh) This book is indeed a response to Rachel Hollis' book and I can absolutely see why "You Who?" needed to be written. Hollis' book is a promotion of self-sufficiency instead of God-dependency. I'm glad Jankovic wrote this book to remind us what the BIBLE says about our identity and who is in control, always sustaining us.]
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
We are getting the answers wrong to life's basic questions: "Who are we? Who decides? What does it mean, and why does it matter anyway?" Rachel is quick to point out that unlike what the world tells us, we are not writing our own stories. When we attempt to 'create' ourselves, it's choosing to defy God and what he created us to do and be. What we try to craft for ourselves is not what gives us value or importance. Our identity and meaning is found in obedience to and worship of our Creator, allowing Him to shape us into who he wants us to be.
Throughout the book, Rachel addresses fallacies like 'You just need to believe in yourself' or 'Follow your heart.' That only you can decide things for your true self. That being 'a daughter of a King' is a concept of privilege. And the implications of self-rescue (leaving or getting rid of anything that separates you from your true self).
True, the theme of obedience feels repetitive. But repetitive in a good way. Because she is trying to shock us out of our 'I'm in control and I can do anything I want because God will always love me and his grace always abounds' lifestyle. God is love. And grace is real and bountiful. But Jesus exemplified more than love. He was the picture-perfect definition of obedience. Scripture is clear- obedience doesn't save us, but are we really saved if we don't desire righteousness?
Let's see... what else... In every chapter she points to Christ. Her chapter on body image is phenomenal. She emphasizes contentment and gratitude....
And she does not shy from the hard truths such as--
We need to DIE to ourselves:
"Stop trying to be true to yourselves, people! Hell is full of the true-to-self crowd! Be true to Christ! Let it all go! You are in good hands! It is far sweeter, more fun, and more interesting to die in Christ than to live to the self."
"We haven’t been called to ‘feel awesome about ourselves”, we have been called to faithfulness. We have been called to His purposes. The reality of following Christ is not that kind of cheap affirmation. It is not an emotional Snuggie for our cold hearts. It is a different thing altogether. It is a cross being carried."
We are NOT enough:
"You are free from worrying that you aren’t enough. You aren’t! None of us is! And that is good news. We weren’t made to be gods, we were made to be worshippers."
"The more like him we become, the more we become the person we were created to be. Instead of carrying a burden that focuses on knowledge of self, we shift the burden to knowledge of Christ. He is sufficient. I am not nor shall I ever be. He is faithful. He is perfect. He is capable. He is enough. And more than all these things together, the sweetest gift of all is that He has given himself to us."
"There is no hope for you that is not Jesus. There’s nothing interesting about you if it is not resurrected in him. There’s nothing defining about you that cannot live in Christ. Your selfishness is dead. Your lust is dead. Your need to be unique is dead. Your envy, greed, obsessions, guilts– they are all dead. Dead and gone in Christ. Stop trying to tidy them up and make them mean something, because they never will."
God doesn't love the selves we create:
"Christians who are struggling deeply with identity issues are getting so little help from other believers… We try to help them arrange their life and identity so they can still have whatever closely held things they have found in themselves (such as being same-sex attracted) and Jesus, too... more and more is being published by other struggling Christians on this topic, but it seems to be nothing more than a bunch of ideas for arranging things in your life so you can still think you qualify as a Christian...We Christians struggle to believe that Jesus could both love us and hate the identities we are fashioning. If he really loved us, he would be willing to be one of the presenting sponsors of whatever life we are busily creating for ourselves. he loves us, right? Aren’t we whatever we make ourselves? Doesn’t he love that?"
The organization of chapters weren't spot on, but the things she talks about do overlap a lot so I couldn't even propose a better plan.
I so appreciated this book in all its bluntness. In a culture of "tolerance" we've accepted a lot less than we are called to. Rachel slaps the blinders off our face and reminds us that history is His story, not ours. Let's stop living in our tiny 'Jesus-sponsored' worlds and Be. His. Entirely.
A few extra quotes for your reading pleasure: (or hello, just go read the whole book!)
"If we try to write our stories like the world does, composing our little plot points and shaping ourselves into what we think it would be neat to be, but we love Jesus, this is just making him one more interesting plot point about us. We put our bumper sticker that says “Jesus – lover “on our little lifestyle car... But Christ will not be managed or contained like that. If he truly bought you with his blood, he did not do so in order to get a sponsorship position in your life. He’s not here to look good next your brand. He bought your life, and you are his."
"We are told over and over and over that you must follow your heart. And what our society has reaped from that unerring pursuit has been exactly what you might expect: a lot of wildly undisciplined and confused people, anxiously following their own wildest ideas, doing every self-indulgent and ill-behaved thing they can think of."
"The world tells us with endless enthusiasm that we can work our way to a perfect state of accepting ourselves and loving ourselves. The goal, they say, is to be able to love what you see in the mirror.… But if we do get ourselves there, what earthly good will it actually do us?… No matter how many times you tell yourself you are fierce or looking hot, nothing will come of it. There’s no salvation, no freedom here... The Christian should have an entirely different set of goals and aspirations. To what end has our body been given to us? So that we might glorify God. Do you know something that glorifies God? Christians glorify God when they are able to look in the mirror at their bodies – with all their faults and flaws and foibles – and truly love the One who gave it to them. That is the measure of a healthy body image."
"We do not continue to evaluate what the apple is doing for us once it is out of sight...This is the kind of simple joy we need to have in coming to the Word... Sometimes you won’t understand what you read, but eat it anyway in joy and gratitude, and it will change you anyway. The very act of eating the Word of God is an act of defining obedience. The Word is alive, and it knows what to do with you even when you don’t know what to do with it. (Heb 4:12)"
[Edit: I have now finished 'Girl, Wash Your Face.' (meh) This book is indeed a response to Rachel Hollis' book and I can absolutely see why "You Who?" needed to be written. Hollis' book is a promotion of self-sufficiency instead of God-dependency. I'm glad Jankovic wrote this book to remind us what the BIBLE says about our identity and who is in control, always sustaining us.]
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America
Michael O. Emerson, Christian Smith
I’ve been trying to challenge myself and really consider what I think about racial inequality. I’ve realized that I largely avoid it. I’ve been coming to terms with the fact that it’s more prevalent than I realize, which as this book points out, stems from my own and my friends’ lack of personal experience. I wanted to read this book because I wanted to better understand how I fit into all of it as a white evangelical Christian. Unfortunately, this author did more condemning than helping—calling the very mission of the church naïve and pointing out all the ways the church failed and will always fail, even if they mean well—without offering any solutions of his own. Emerson’s bias against Christians is fairly evident and took away from the punch of some of his better points. It would seem he has set out on a mission of blame.
It makes it hard to take what an author says seriously when he chooses to conclude his book with this quote “The Evangelical Protestant mind has never relished complexity. Indeed its crusading genius, whether in religion or politics, has always tended toward an oversimplification of issues and the substitution of inspiration and zeal for critical analysis and series reflection,” commenting that what Christians need to do is to “consider engaging in more serious reflection on race-relations issues, in dialogue with educated others…”
I am not defending every action and idea that comes from Christians and the church. He begins the book by exposing a lot of the real failings of the church in the past—we can’t deny Christians’ complicity in the slave trade and support of the past thought that black people were inferior to whites. Christianity, like every other religion, including atheism, has stains in their past, violence and ideals to be ashamed of. And we must do better.
Emerson’s main critique of the church is unfounded at its core. He condemns the church for failing to accomplish a goal they’ve never claimed as their priority. To Emerson, the very top priority of a church is/should be racial reconciliation. However, Jesus clearly lays out the core mission of the church in the Great Commission passages. The mission of the church is to proclaim the Word of God and introduce people to Jesus and the saving power of the gospel. Just because racial reconciliation isn’t the top priority does not mean that it’s not a priority at all! Racial equality and social justice are both found in Scripture. Kevin DeYoung says in his book, The Mission of the Church, “Ultimately, if the church does not preach Christ and him crucified, if the church does not plant, nurture, and establish more churches, if the church does not teach the nations to obey Christ, no one else and nothing else will. And yet, many others will meet physical needs.”
Much of the book is contrasting evangelicals’ focus of the individual vs structural change. Emerson is convinced that changing individuals will effectively do nothing for racism. Christians’ effort to change the world by leading individuals to Christ, to him is essentially saying our solution is to just ‘make friends’ with people from other races. That severely minimalizes the supernatural power of God and the Holy Spirit and does not take into account the worldview of Christianity as a whole. Of course, we still care about helping people on earth, but to strive for earthly restoration above and before spiritual restoration is not what the Bible teaches us to do or what Jesus exemplified.
Placing an emphasis on evangelism is not avoiding the problem. In John Piper’s book, Bloodlines, he says, “The impact of the gospel in race relations is unpredictable. It has potentials that no one can conceive. And, to our shame, there have been many contradictions between what the gospel is and what professing Christians have done… But the answer to those inconsistencies is not to domesticate the gospel into another ideological mule to help pull the wagon of social progress.” We cannot underestimate the power of the gospel. And yet, we are still called to “act justly and love mercy” and striving to help those oppressed by a broken system certainly qualifies.
It's telling that he would include this quote from Tony Warner, Georgia area director for InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, “White evangelicals are more willing to pursue a white conservative political agenda than to be reconciled with their African-American brothers and sisters. It raises a fundamental question of their belief and commitment to the biblical gospel.” Granted this may describe some people, but this is an unfair statement for Warner to make and Emerson to perpetuate. It’s creating an unreasonable choice between two undefined items that aren’t even on the same spectrum and flagrantly and boldly questioning their faith as if the response was indicative of such things.
Emerson can disagree with the theology of Christianity, but it seems as if he has written an entire book to declare Evangelicals as failures when he clearly doesn’t have the same standard or definition on what ‘failing’ entails.
Of course, I am not so naïve to think Christians are fantastically succeeding either. And that’s where we can still glean some valuable information from this book. The sections he talks about ‘ingroups’ and outgroups’ is a good reminder. Because humans can’t help but categorize people and subconsciously view people according to groups, we need to be aware when we make judgments on people. Is our thinking fair, or are we classifying the cause of their behaviors as internal or external based on their similarity to ourselves? Additionally, I felt his parable regarding the two people in different weight loss situations/environments to be convicting in how I view ‘equal opportunity.’ Though aware of “white privilege,” I tend to fall into the thinking that everyone can be successful if they just try hard enough. This parable helped me to realize the struggle for others in a new way. One huge takeaway for Christians for this book would be to not assume we know what’s going on, but to expose ourselves to a reality that we have never experienced. Listen more and talk less.
Unfortunately, this book frankly did nothing to suggest any solutions or validate the good that Evangelicals do offer. One of the last paragraphs of this book, meant to summarize the thesis, actually doesn’t say anything. They made it sound academic, but I don’t think saying “a solution ought to adequately account for the complex factors that perpetuate the problem… and work against them… requiring attention to multiple factors… and replace structural barriers such as inequality with structural supports like equality” is helpful at all. It tells us nothing but-‘find the problem consider the information, and fix it.’ After an entire book, you’d think their conclusion would be a little more specific.
I would only recommend this book if you are not going to ONLY read this book. Read this, if you will also read:
- Bloodlines: Race, Cross, and the Christian, by John Piper (reviewed here )
- What is the Mission of the Church?, by Kevin Deyoung (reviewed here )
- Talking to Strangers, by Malcolm Gladwell (reviewed here )
All of these books offer a piece of the complex and ever-changing puzzle of racism in America.
Side note: This book is a sociological book. Written in 2000, it may no longer be the most relevant in terms of statistics and data, especially considering the terms of their research. Their small sample size of 2500 people and their methodology in getting responses must be considered in evaluating their data, as well as how they defined “Christian” for their responders.
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
It makes it hard to take what an author says seriously when he chooses to conclude his book with this quote “The Evangelical Protestant mind has never relished complexity. Indeed its crusading genius, whether in religion or politics, has always tended toward an oversimplification of issues and the substitution of inspiration and zeal for critical analysis and series reflection,” commenting that what Christians need to do is to “consider engaging in more serious reflection on race-relations issues, in dialogue with educated others…”
I am not defending every action and idea that comes from Christians and the church. He begins the book by exposing a lot of the real failings of the church in the past—we can’t deny Christians’ complicity in the slave trade and support of the past thought that black people were inferior to whites. Christianity, like every other religion, including atheism, has stains in their past, violence and ideals to be ashamed of. And we must do better.
Emerson’s main critique of the church is unfounded at its core. He condemns the church for failing to accomplish a goal they’ve never claimed as their priority. To Emerson, the very top priority of a church is/should be racial reconciliation. However, Jesus clearly lays out the core mission of the church in the Great Commission passages. The mission of the church is to proclaim the Word of God and introduce people to Jesus and the saving power of the gospel. Just because racial reconciliation isn’t the top priority does not mean that it’s not a priority at all! Racial equality and social justice are both found in Scripture. Kevin DeYoung says in his book, The Mission of the Church, “Ultimately, if the church does not preach Christ and him crucified, if the church does not plant, nurture, and establish more churches, if the church does not teach the nations to obey Christ, no one else and nothing else will. And yet, many others will meet physical needs.”
Much of the book is contrasting evangelicals’ focus of the individual vs structural change. Emerson is convinced that changing individuals will effectively do nothing for racism. Christians’ effort to change the world by leading individuals to Christ, to him is essentially saying our solution is to just ‘make friends’ with people from other races. That severely minimalizes the supernatural power of God and the Holy Spirit and does not take into account the worldview of Christianity as a whole. Of course, we still care about helping people on earth, but to strive for earthly restoration above and before spiritual restoration is not what the Bible teaches us to do or what Jesus exemplified.
Placing an emphasis on evangelism is not avoiding the problem. In John Piper’s book, Bloodlines, he says, “The impact of the gospel in race relations is unpredictable. It has potentials that no one can conceive. And, to our shame, there have been many contradictions between what the gospel is and what professing Christians have done… But the answer to those inconsistencies is not to domesticate the gospel into another ideological mule to help pull the wagon of social progress.” We cannot underestimate the power of the gospel. And yet, we are still called to “act justly and love mercy” and striving to help those oppressed by a broken system certainly qualifies.
It's telling that he would include this quote from Tony Warner, Georgia area director for InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, “White evangelicals are more willing to pursue a white conservative political agenda than to be reconciled with their African-American brothers and sisters. It raises a fundamental question of their belief and commitment to the biblical gospel.” Granted this may describe some people, but this is an unfair statement for Warner to make and Emerson to perpetuate. It’s creating an unreasonable choice between two undefined items that aren’t even on the same spectrum and flagrantly and boldly questioning their faith as if the response was indicative of such things.
Emerson can disagree with the theology of Christianity, but it seems as if he has written an entire book to declare Evangelicals as failures when he clearly doesn’t have the same standard or definition on what ‘failing’ entails.
Of course, I am not so naïve to think Christians are fantastically succeeding either. And that’s where we can still glean some valuable information from this book. The sections he talks about ‘ingroups’ and outgroups’ is a good reminder. Because humans can’t help but categorize people and subconsciously view people according to groups, we need to be aware when we make judgments on people. Is our thinking fair, or are we classifying the cause of their behaviors as internal or external based on their similarity to ourselves? Additionally, I felt his parable regarding the two people in different weight loss situations/environments to be convicting in how I view ‘equal opportunity.’ Though aware of “white privilege,” I tend to fall into the thinking that everyone can be successful if they just try hard enough. This parable helped me to realize the struggle for others in a new way. One huge takeaway for Christians for this book would be to not assume we know what’s going on, but to expose ourselves to a reality that we have never experienced. Listen more and talk less.
Unfortunately, this book frankly did nothing to suggest any solutions or validate the good that Evangelicals do offer. One of the last paragraphs of this book, meant to summarize the thesis, actually doesn’t say anything. They made it sound academic, but I don’t think saying “a solution ought to adequately account for the complex factors that perpetuate the problem… and work against them… requiring attention to multiple factors… and replace structural barriers such as inequality with structural supports like equality” is helpful at all. It tells us nothing but-‘find the problem consider the information, and fix it.’ After an entire book, you’d think their conclusion would be a little more specific.
I would only recommend this book if you are not going to ONLY read this book. Read this, if you will also read:
- Bloodlines: Race, Cross, and the Christian, by John Piper (reviewed here )
- What is the Mission of the Church?, by Kevin Deyoung (reviewed here )
- Talking to Strangers, by Malcolm Gladwell (reviewed here )
All of these books offer a piece of the complex and ever-changing puzzle of racism in America.
Side note: This book is a sociological book. Written in 2000, it may no longer be the most relevant in terms of statistics and data, especially considering the terms of their research. Their small sample size of 2500 people and their methodology in getting responses must be considered in evaluating their data, as well as how they defined “Christian” for their responders.
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
Why do we read books written by celebrities? Is it for insider info on their movies/shows, celebrity gossip, a peek into what it's like to be a celebrity, to read their story to fame, or to hope they are relatable? I don't really know. But for whatever subconscious purpose I read this book, it was not met. I came away feeling pretty similarly as when I read Amy Poehler's Yes Please book (which was also disappointed). I think they are both awesome actresses and very funny/witty, but their books just didn't land for me.
The most annoying for me was all the language and crudeness. Lots of f-words. Really she hit all the words pretty frequently. A lot of sexual references. Just skip her chapter on boys altogether. Also similar to Poehler's book was that almost every anecdote involved her being drunk or high or wishing she were drunk or high.
There were some stories that gave us more information about her journey to fame, but because she started in theater and stage, those chapters were full of jokes and references to people/plays/musicals that mean nothing to me. To her credit, I am fairly uncultured so they are probably well-known.
Then there was her chapter describing various holiday parties she would throw which was completely random compared to the rest of her book. I am a proponent of random and funny and whenever I live a life worthy of a memoir, it will be a disjointed mess of awesomeness, but you kinda have to choose one or the other. You can't just throw in a few random and pointless chapters in a structured book already achieving a particular goal. Doesn't have the same comedic effect in my opinion.
She definitely goes out of her way to be self-deprecating and paint herself as a normal person living a celebrity-status life. And I do still feel like she's more down-to-earth than a lot of celebrities and do appreciate that about her. But in this book, it came off as a little over the top. Like she was more so trying to just prove to herself that she was still a normal person. But normal or not- I still didn't find her very relatable.
I don't know exactly why I read this book or what I expected to get out of it but I would have liked to come away thinking 'She is hilarious' or 'What an inspiring story' or 'Did you know [insert fun or interesting fact or story about how the "other side" lives]...??' or 'I think we could be friends' or 'Now I appreciate Twilight or Pitch Perfect more now.' Instead I think 'Her parents are awesome' and 'What did I even just read?' And honestly, if you would have taken out all the language and crude content, I have a feeling my experience would have been pretty different. But I guess that's not what sells these days. Or maybe I'm just in a very small minority that cares about that stuff. Either way, the point stands that I did not care for this book.
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
The most annoying for me was all the language and crudeness. Lots of f-words. Really she hit all the words pretty frequently. A lot of sexual references. Just skip her chapter on boys altogether. Also similar to Poehler's book was that almost every anecdote involved her being drunk or high or wishing she were drunk or high.
There were some stories that gave us more information about her journey to fame, but because she started in theater and stage, those chapters were full of jokes and references to people/plays/musicals that mean nothing to me. To her credit, I am fairly uncultured so they are probably well-known.
Then there was her chapter describing various holiday parties she would throw which was completely random compared to the rest of her book. I am a proponent of random and funny and whenever I live a life worthy of a memoir, it will be a disjointed mess of awesomeness, but you kinda have to choose one or the other. You can't just throw in a few random and pointless chapters in a structured book already achieving a particular goal. Doesn't have the same comedic effect in my opinion.
She definitely goes out of her way to be self-deprecating and paint herself as a normal person living a celebrity-status life. And I do still feel like she's more down-to-earth than a lot of celebrities and do appreciate that about her. But in this book, it came off as a little over the top. Like she was more so trying to just prove to herself that she was still a normal person. But normal or not- I still didn't find her very relatable.
I don't know exactly why I read this book or what I expected to get out of it but I would have liked to come away thinking 'She is hilarious' or 'What an inspiring story' or 'Did you know [insert fun or interesting fact or story about how the "other side" lives]...??' or 'I think we could be friends' or 'Now I appreciate Twilight or Pitch Perfect more now.' Instead I think 'Her parents are awesome' and 'What did I even just read?' And honestly, if you would have taken out all the language and crude content, I have a feeling my experience would have been pretty different. But I guess that's not what sells these days. Or maybe I'm just in a very small minority that cares about that stuff. Either way, the point stands that I did not care for this book.
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
Giving reviews of memoirs is always a difficult task, as I mentioned in my review of the book Blankets. It's hard to criticize a book about someone's life. I have a hard time separating the content from the literary aspects so I suppose you can take my opinion with a grain of salt.
Other reviewers haven't liked the choppiness of the writing style but I actually liked that part. I liked the snippets and short stories because I feel like that's how memories work. We don't remember things in one long story. We have certain events that stick with us and those are the things that shape our character, demeanor, and in Jeannette's case- her resilience. I think the jumpiness of the scenes is necessary in this story and essential to describing her life and memories.
Others thought it was ridiculous that she could remember so much, especially in her younger years. And I admit it's hard to know what is all true from those earlier memories, but I decided to give her the benefit of the doubt and am assuming some of the stories are shared from her other siblings. Her older sister especially most likely filled in some of those gaps.
My 2 rating is primarily based on the absolute disgust of her parents' selfishness. Jeannette depicts her parents as pretty intelligent human beings as they did so much 'teaching' at home, but I find that so hard to believe that intelligent people like that could live such dysfunctional and illogical lives. They had the means to provide for themselves and their family and they deliberately choose not to. Their oldest child was virtually blind and they refused to get her glasses- that makes NO sense. How can they be so selfish as to deny their child the right to SEE things?! I spent a lot of my time fuming as I read this. I, like other readers, have a hard time understanding Jeanette's somewhat cavalier attitude toward her past in the end of the book. After everything her parents put her and her siblings through, I find it very hard to see her parents not held accountable for what they did but simply glossed over and excused as 'unique.' It's not unique, it's wrong and should not happen.
I guess I would have liked to see more of Jeannette's process in getting to the place of forgiveness, grace, and redemption. There is obviously always a place for those things in every situation, and it would only be through God's grace that I would have been able to forgive parents like that, but if that is the case here, I think it would have been valuable to the reader to walk through Jeannette's process of acknowledging her past for the disgrace it was and forgiving her parents for the things they did. There was a little bit of it, but not enough for me to feel good about where the family is at by the end of the book.
Yes, Jeannette was brave to write this. Yes, the literary aspects of this book were great. But I can't give more than a 2 because in my mind, anything higher is somehow validating her parents' selfishness and I can't be a part of that. Again, not really the way these ratings are designed to work, but nonetheless what my heart allows me to do.
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
Other reviewers haven't liked the choppiness of the writing style but I actually liked that part. I liked the snippets and short stories because I feel like that's how memories work. We don't remember things in one long story. We have certain events that stick with us and those are the things that shape our character, demeanor, and in Jeannette's case- her resilience. I think the jumpiness of the scenes is necessary in this story and essential to describing her life and memories.
Others thought it was ridiculous that she could remember so much, especially in her younger years. And I admit it's hard to know what is all true from those earlier memories, but I decided to give her the benefit of the doubt and am assuming some of the stories are shared from her other siblings. Her older sister especially most likely filled in some of those gaps.
My 2 rating is primarily based on the absolute disgust of her parents' selfishness. Jeannette depicts her parents as pretty intelligent human beings as they did so much 'teaching' at home, but I find that so hard to believe that intelligent people like that could live such dysfunctional and illogical lives. They had the means to provide for themselves and their family and they deliberately choose not to. Their oldest child was virtually blind and they refused to get her glasses- that makes NO sense. How can they be so selfish as to deny their child the right to SEE things?! I spent a lot of my time fuming as I read this. I, like other readers, have a hard time understanding Jeanette's somewhat cavalier attitude toward her past in the end of the book. After everything her parents put her and her siblings through, I find it very hard to see her parents not held accountable for what they did but simply glossed over and excused as 'unique.' It's not unique, it's wrong and should not happen.
I guess I would have liked to see more of Jeannette's process in getting to the place of forgiveness, grace, and redemption. There is obviously always a place for those things in every situation, and it would only be through God's grace that I would have been able to forgive parents like that, but if that is the case here, I think it would have been valuable to the reader to walk through Jeannette's process of acknowledging her past for the disgrace it was and forgiving her parents for the things they did. There was a little bit of it, but not enough for me to feel good about where the family is at by the end of the book.
Yes, Jeannette was brave to write this. Yes, the literary aspects of this book were great. But I can't give more than a 2 because in my mind, anything higher is somehow validating her parents' selfishness and I can't be a part of that. Again, not really the way these ratings are designed to work, but nonetheless what my heart allows me to do.
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
I really enjoyed this book. Although, I feel like it was a stronger read for men than for women. I found the 'woman chapters' a bit lacking. They seemed a bit flowery and anecdotal to me, I would have liked to have read more concrete examples or 'lists' as found in the 'man chapters.' (I think it would be best read in conjunction with Wayne Grudem's book 'Evangelical Feminism' or his and John Piper's joint book '50 Crucial Questions About Manhood and Womanhood.) And maybe it's just because it was all information I had read before.
In spite of that, I found the man chapters still helpful in understanding my husband better, recognizing more deeply his burden as head of our household; and providing insightful guidelines in raising sons or helping daughters see godly men. This conversation is so important in today's culture where the norm is 'following your heart' and 'doing whatever feels good' instead of holding up our behavior and thoughts to Scripture and following Christ's example. It's really hard to be on the side that sounds limiting, but as this title suggests, abiding in Christ and seeking fulfillment, identity, and purpose in him is the ultimate and only source of joy in this broken world. This book may not address every aspect of each issue but it aims to tackle the heart issues- where sin steps in to distort that which God created to be good. And we need to get that part right first, or we don't have a foundation for anything else.
From its pages:
"[God] did not make us all the same. He loves diversity. He revels in it. He created a world that pulses with differences, that explodes with color, that includes roaring waterfalls and self-inflating lizards and rapt, at-attention meerkats. But humankind, man and woman, is the pinnacle of his creation."
"The God of Scripture is not our life coach. He is our Lord. We’re used to this word as Christians, and so it loses its edge. This divine title signifies that God is our master. He is our sovereign. He is our ruler. He sets the tone for right and wrong. He calls us to account for our sin. His gospel brings both bad news and good news. It informs us that we are sinful and destined for eternal judgment. It calls us to be re-created. Our chief need is not affirmation but Christ-powered transformation… Men are called to be men. Women are called to be women. We are not free to choose our sexual predilections. We do not have the authority to remake our gender."
"The roles are not regulated by competency… Yes, women lead and provide and protect in many ways every day, just like men affirm and nurture and trust….the husband steps out first in leading, and the wife affirms his initiative in doing so… The husband takes up the mantle of provision, of figuring out how to holistically care for his family along with her help, and the wife nurtures that instinct and strategy… The husband always leans forward in the face of sacrifice, in the name of love, and the wife, in the safety of that love, trusts him."
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
In spite of that, I found the man chapters still helpful in understanding my husband better, recognizing more deeply his burden as head of our household; and providing insightful guidelines in raising sons or helping daughters see godly men. This conversation is so important in today's culture where the norm is 'following your heart' and 'doing whatever feels good' instead of holding up our behavior and thoughts to Scripture and following Christ's example. It's really hard to be on the side that sounds limiting, but as this title suggests, abiding in Christ and seeking fulfillment, identity, and purpose in him is the ultimate and only source of joy in this broken world. This book may not address every aspect of each issue but it aims to tackle the heart issues- where sin steps in to distort that which God created to be good. And we need to get that part right first, or we don't have a foundation for anything else.
From its pages:
"[God] did not make us all the same. He loves diversity. He revels in it. He created a world that pulses with differences, that explodes with color, that includes roaring waterfalls and self-inflating lizards and rapt, at-attention meerkats. But humankind, man and woman, is the pinnacle of his creation."
"The God of Scripture is not our life coach. He is our Lord. We’re used to this word as Christians, and so it loses its edge. This divine title signifies that God is our master. He is our sovereign. He is our ruler. He sets the tone for right and wrong. He calls us to account for our sin. His gospel brings both bad news and good news. It informs us that we are sinful and destined for eternal judgment. It calls us to be re-created. Our chief need is not affirmation but Christ-powered transformation… Men are called to be men. Women are called to be women. We are not free to choose our sexual predilections. We do not have the authority to remake our gender."
"The roles are not regulated by competency… Yes, women lead and provide and protect in many ways every day, just like men affirm and nurture and trust….the husband steps out first in leading, and the wife affirms his initiative in doing so… The husband takes up the mantle of provision, of figuring out how to holistically care for his family along with her help, and the wife nurtures that instinct and strategy… The husband always leans forward in the face of sacrifice, in the name of love, and the wife, in the safety of that love, trusts him."
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
Intense. Tosca starts out by letting us in on the happenings inside the bunker. When Noah’s daily messages stop coming the people are left wondering what is going on outside the silo and what will the world be like when the door finally opens? Tosca captured my attention right away with the mystery and suspense. The added deadline of finding medicine for Julie before she died magnified the urgency and kept the pages flipping.
The finding of the medicine occupied most of the book which surprised me a little. I thought there would be more focus on the terrorism aspect and the drama of creating the vaccine. Its hard to know which would have been more exciting. However I recognize that in order to do that we would not have been able to keep the seamless singular POV through Wynter so it makes more sense as is.
I loved the chase and the action and that Tosca wasn’t afraid to kill off her characters. It illicits more emotion and engagement with the story and the outcome.
I liked seeing Wynter escaping the isolation of the Enclave just to enter into the isolation of the silo and how we got to see her character grow through her different captivities.
One thing I wished would have been handled differently was the answer to the security footage tape showing Noah and the others leaving the farm. We got the answer later but it was obscure and didn’t fit the tone of the tape. It was basically a side note instead of the ominous and important role it first appeared to have.
Also, a tiny annoyance was how a lot of the sentences started without a subject, i.e. statements starting with ‘can’ and ‘am’ etc. just felt disjointed reading those in my head, I almost always caught myself rereading them to see if I missed something.
All that to say, another great Tosca Lee book and was a satisfying sequel to The Line Between!
Bonus shoutout for Kearney and Runza and Des Moines!
** I received an ARC via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review **
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
The finding of the medicine occupied most of the book which surprised me a little. I thought there would be more focus on the terrorism aspect and the drama of creating the vaccine. Its hard to know which would have been more exciting. However I recognize that in order to do that we would not have been able to keep the seamless singular POV through Wynter so it makes more sense as is.
I loved the chase and the action and that Tosca wasn’t afraid to kill off her characters. It illicits more emotion and engagement with the story and the outcome.
I liked seeing Wynter escaping the isolation of the Enclave just to enter into the isolation of the silo and how we got to see her character grow through her different captivities.
One thing I wished would have been handled differently was the answer to the security footage tape showing Noah and the others leaving the farm. We got the answer later but it was obscure and didn’t fit the tone of the tape. It was basically a side note instead of the ominous and important role it first appeared to have.
Also, a tiny annoyance was how a lot of the sentences started without a subject, i.e. statements starting with ‘can’ and ‘am’ etc. just felt disjointed reading those in my head, I almost always caught myself rereading them to see if I missed something.
All that to say, another great Tosca Lee book and was a satisfying sequel to The Line Between!
Bonus shoutout for Kearney and Runza and Des Moines!
** I received an ARC via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review **
See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!