shelfreflectionofficial's Reviews (844)

“This story is about women—about the way we bend, and love and listen, the way we forgive, forgive, forgive.”

I love the subtitle of this book.

Amy Butcher, the author, has come to meet Joy “Mothertrucker” Wiebe, an Instagram star and the only female trucker to traverse the most dangerous road in America.

“The James W. Dalton Highway is the most dangerous road in America, 414 miles of gravel and occasional pavement that extends north from Fairbanks, Alaska, to the industrial town of Deadhorse and the oil fields of Prudhoe Bay. More drivers die on that road annually than anywhere else in our America, in no small part because its miles are subjected to the worst of Mother Nature.”

Amy and Joy find kinship in their shared experiences of domestic abuse.

In the isolation of their trek north, Amy finds Joy— the person— and Joy helps Amy find herself again, and together they chase the loneliness away.

“Joy gave me a sense of hope. She demonstrated every day the way a woman could put herself fearlessly out into the world, and I envied that strength, that courage.”

Joy was a major influence to the people of Alaska. And sadly, we say ‘was’ because just months after Amy visited Joy, Joy’s rig went off the road, crashing below. She died instantly. She left behind a host of people in her wake who experienced her kindness and her sacrifice.

“This, perhaps, was Joy’s greatest legacy: a network of people she was helping who are now helping one another… Joy was a woman who spent her days placing little antennae feelers out into the world, feeling for pain or suffering, feeling for the people who needed her.”


I think we all find ourselves on lonely roads, looking for joy. We all experience suffering of some kind and we wonder if there is anything better for us. Is this all there is? Where is the hope and where is the joy?

While I think Amy ultimately misses the mark, there is true Joy and Hope on our lonely roads and I’ll share that later in this review.


I will say, this book’s title, subtitle, cover, and description is a bit misleading, as other reviewers have commented as well.

I thought I would be reading a story that focuses on Joy, her life, her fame, the road she spends her life on. And we definitely get some of that, but I would say Amy has used Joy’s story and influence in her own life as a vehicle to tell her[ Amy’s] own story more than Joy’s.

I was disappointed in that respect.

That seems unfair to Amy. Everyone has a story worth sharing and we are better for listening, but I wish they would have marketed it differently. It felt like a bait-and-switch. And I think most people will pick up this book and be dissatisfied with the Joy-to-Amy ratio.


There are three major themes in this book: Abuse, Faith, and Politics.

Some reviewers have commented on the ‘religiousness’ of this book and I’m a bit surprised by that. Amy is searching spiritually, to be sure, but she is wrestling with the dissonance of what she imagines faith should be and what she has experienced firsthand. And I don’t think she ends up settling anywhere or advocating for Christianity. If anything, I would imagine she is still an agnostic.

Or she worships Joy.

Amy stood in awe and reverence of Joy, holding her on a pedestal and viewing her as her savior. Joy’s sudden death should have reminded Amy that our hope is not in humanity. As amazing and influential and wise and loving as people can be— no mortal being can save any other mortal being.


Anyway, I will reflect on each major theme and offer my own commentary.

Goodreads says I have too many words so to get the full review you'll have to visit HERE.


Abuse

Amy Butcher is a college professor who teaches classes on feminism.

“[My students] wrote powerful essays about our culture, about the many ways violence against women was rampant, systemic, and, ultimately, all about control.”

“Abuse is not deterred by social class, by economic or financial privilege, by sexual orientation or race. These things undoubtedly influence how easy it is to leave— and to be successful in that endeavor, to be supported and safe and even believed— but they are in no way a barrier to abuse.”

Reading this book, it is clear that Amy has a pretty polarized view of men. Granted, she has experienced abuse from more than one to taint her perspective.

Abuse is real and I appreciate Amy sharing her story and helping people understand how abuse is not just physical, it’s mental, verbal, and spiritual, and it should not happen. Women are indeed vulnerable to the lust and power trips of men who take advantage.

But she makes some pretty strong and pointed statements that gave me pause.

- “Every year we [women] are stalked and slaughtered, beaten and battered, snuffed out, slain. I knew this but didn’t really know it until the spring that I met Joy, when the man I loved more than any other— a man who was good-natured, funny, kind— stood in my downstairs hallway screaming, looming over me, lunatic.”

- “It is more dangerous to be a woman in Alaska than anywhere else in America. This is a state that routinely ranks highest among reported cases of domestic violence, and that violence is largely perpetuated against Indigenous Alaskan women… 5700 Native American women have been reported missing nationwide since 2016 alone that that number is likely an undercount.”

- “It feels like a particularly prescriptive, conciliatory feminine mantra: we are uniquely strengthened by our pain, which the world is all too eager to dole out on us.”

- “The news depicted an outside world intent on hurting and killing women, and it made aloneness something to fear.”

- “We need to prioritize the lives of women.”

Her commentary throughout the book elevated the violence against women and painted a picture that the world is out to harm women at a higher rate than men. Women, of all the things we can be, are most often victims.

But when I do my own research, I don’t really find this picture.

79% of homicide victims are male.

Males make up 52.6% of missing person reports.

Women have higher percentages of domestic violence in almost every state, but men are not that far behind, sometimes only a few percentage points lower.

Alaska is not the highest ranked for domestic violence cases. Alaska is ranked 6th (which is still high). I’m not sure what her statistic of missing Native Americans is supposed to mean, but from what I can find, Native Americans are not the highest ranked race of abuse victims. White and Black are, respectively. I didn’t do enough research to determine the percentage of each race the numbers were.

Of course, this isn’t the complete picture. Whether or not women vastly outnumber men as victims, I think there is something to be said about women suffering in unique ways that men (usually) don’t. Women feel a different kind of fear and vulnerability. I’m guessing a higher percentage of female homicides involve sexual assault.

I guess my discomfort is that there has been a very big cultural shift against men. I do not want to ignore women and their suffering. I don’t want to hinder efforts to reduce and eliminate domestic violence. But I believe there has to be a way to do that where we are not collectively demoting all men to scum-of-the-earth status.

When we look at the violence in the world. Men are not immune from its effects. They matter too.

And not all men are abusers. Statistics on victims don’t necessarily give us a clear pictures of the perpetrators. We can’t make blanket statements about ‘men’ wanting to harm women, being violent, being dominant.

If we look at the world, and we look at the violence, we see people who want to hurt people. We see selfishness and people out to follow their own truths and do whatever makes them happy, at any cost.

Unfortunately, suffering is not unique to any one group of people.



One last important comment:

“I am a woman with plenty of regrets— plenty of missteps and wrongdoings— the biggest mistake I’ve ever made was allowing a man to decide if I was worthy, and then believing him when he said I wasn’t.”

This is a true and monumental saying. If we are determining our worth based on other people’s opinions or treatment of us, we will never amount to what we hope to. Amy finally stopped believing her worth was tied to her boyfriend’s words and behavior.

But she didn’t follow that thread of thought to its end.

We have worth because we are created in the very image of God. He gives us our worth. His love and his grace is unconditional. We will find no earthly equivalent. There is no other explanation that is as satisfying and meaningful as the freedom and value and love we find in our Creator.

Faith

That is a good segue to the faith theme of this book.

Amy is an agnostic and started dating Dave, a Christian. However when they became sexually active after Dave had said he didn’t want to, he felt the shame of his choices and took out his shame and guilt on Amy.

“The man I love is also Christian. He’s been trying to scream his faith into me.”

“The faith, the rules, the scripture might change, but the idea is always, more or less, the same: Follow this faith or else.”

“I wanted to see faith as good.”

I can see how this would put her off to Christianity. He was not walking the walk of the Bible he claimed to believe. And what’s more, he was inflicting emotional and spiritual abuse on Amy. Who would want to follow a faith that promotes that?

“Dave’s Bible was one in which women were mostly objects, their bodies instruments: tools of labor, punishment, or temptation. Women washed the feet of Jesus, or women gave birth without sex to the son of God, or women were prostitutes who sometimes helped men by hiding them in walls. The Biblical women were always subservient. They did not teach classes on contemporary feminism.”

Dave talked about “how much holier the women were who served, how selfless, how sanctified.”

There are many who hold the Bible in their hands and then use it to harm others. However, the Bible is pro-people. And it is very pro-woman. I think many people have a misconception of how the Bible treats women.

But if you read the Bible you won’t find what she’s claiming. There are many books that attest to this. Michael J. Kruger’s book, Surviving Religion 101 discusses the idea that the Bible oppresses women. He says that when we look closely, “we find a vision for men and women having equal dignity and worth— a vision that would have been radical and counter cultural in the context of the ancient world.”

The Greco-Roman world promoted female infanticide and “females probably composed only about 1/3 of the population in pagan circles” whereas “they made up about 2/3 of Christian circles.” Females found dignity and value and protection in the church. We see the way Jesus treated women— he talked to them, he healed them, he traveled with them and he taught them. This was countercultural.

Women are honored in Scripture. Jesus first appeared to a woman after his resurrection. During that time women were not considered reliable eyewitnesses. But we see all throughout Scripture women playing major roles in God’s plans.

Of course there are lots of terrifying interpretations of the submission passages in the New Testament, but those who hear the word ‘submit’ and run away have not done their due diligence in looking at Scripture. Submission is never forced. And wives are called submit to their own husbands (not all men) in the context of the husbands being commanded to love their wives sacrificially. There are no grounds for men to claim dominance, to silence their wives, or to demean them in any way. There is simply no evidence for this in Scripture.

Dave did not share the truth with Amy. He shared his own sin and guilt in a destructive and harmful way that the Bible does not condone.

As far as being selfless and serving… that is not just a call to women. It is a call to all who desire to follow Jesus. Jesus was the ultimate example of being selfless. He came to serve and give his life for the very people who killed him. Dave did not portray the full truth. We honor God when we obey, when we sacrifice of ourselves for others. But this is not a task relegated to one gender.

I mentioned before that it seemed like Amy viewed Joy as her savior. Here are somethings she said:

- “Not for the first time, I begin to imagine Joy as God.”

- “Is it God or is it Joy that makes me feel like I am capable, that I am in control, stable, strong? The way I feel inside Joy’s presence is how others articulate their belief in God.”

- “‘What would Joy do? WWJD,’ I say.”

- “Joy insisted it was God’s miracle that brought the two of us together, but I don’t believe in miracles. I believe she did this. I did this. We.”

Joy was the catalyst for Amy to start making changes in her life and to recognize the abuse for what it was. There is no denying the impact Joy’s words and love had on Amy. There is nothing wrong with that.

But every time Joy mentioned God, Amy was ready to provide another explanation. I think she’s searching in the sense that she desires to understand what she sees in the world and to find hope for a way out of it. But she’s not searching in the sense that she seems to refuse to consider the possibility that God does exist.

Maybe she needs to read the book ‘Why God Makes Sense in a World that Doesn’t.’


“I’ve spent so much of my life searching for a faith that aligns with my lived experience, and of course I haven’t found it, because I’ve been looking in all the wrong places. I have been looking for God in men. It’s no wonder I can’t relate to a faith or an ideology that holds at its center a figure who resembles all the men who’ve ever hurt me.”

I hope she isn’t saying that Jesus resembles all the men who’ve ever hurt her. Men cannot save us. Women cannot save us. But Jesus can. If she truly looks at who Jesus is, she will not see her abusers. She will see truth, life, love, grace, patience, gentleness, forbearance, self-control, peace.

Dane Ortlund writes about the heart of Christ in his book Gentle and Lowly.

Nabeel Quereshi went on a quest to disprove Jesus as God and in fact found himself face to face with his Savior. He recounts his questions and struggles in his book Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus.



Politics

I won’t spend a lot of time on this section. We’ve probably all had enough politics by now. It seems to find it’s way in every book these days.

I’m including this just to acknowledge that it takes up space in the book.

The politics in this book revolve around the Trans-Alaska Pipeline and the oil industry at large and it’s affect on the environment, indigenous people, and poor communities.

Some of her thoughts:

- “These life-threatening burdens are the result of systemic oppression,” the NAACP reports, “perpetuated by the traditional energy industry, which exposes communities to health, economic and social hazards.”

- “The industries their jobs support— and the industry that gives Joy’s life so much meaning— is antithetical not only to Native politics, but to Native cultures, Native lives. I am grateful for Joy… but I’ve begun to feel guilty to be on this highway… to further exacerbate a wound through a land that is not ours.”

- “The very fact of American life— a life I enjoy, take pleasure from— insists on a hierarchy of profit that leaves the marginalized in ruin: communities disrupted, food and shelter resources depleted, landscapes decimated.”

- “Time and time again, the industrialization of America relies on tracing the troubled fault lines of systemic racism, ecological ruin, and poverty. Whole communities are upended, ways of living disrupted, and lands and bodies poisoned while wealthy Americans just get wealthier. I look at Joy, who looks at me. We are complicit in all of it.”

I honestly don’t know enough about the environment and the economy to argue either way. It’s definitely something to consider, but oil seems pretty necessary to our economy and as a country being self-sufficient in oil production seems like a pretty big win.

I think we have to think about these things but when anyone starts using the word systemic oppression and trying to attach guilt to everyone, I’m sniffing out some tracks of critical theory and I’m hesitant to jump on the bandwagon of Amy’s ideas.

Of course we have to mention her Donald Trump comments.

“That Donald Trump is a hero among these people— truckers, oil field workers, Alaskans more generally— comes as no surprise. This is a place that uniquely benefits from Republican policies, a region where the majority values financial profits more than the consequences of exploitation: of land, of people, of policy. The towns that exist up here— and indeed, the industries— exist solely for the purpose of economic gain”

The only thing I’m going to say about this is:
Is anyone else tired of a person’s character and morality being predicated on the sole fact of their vote in 2016 and 2020? Is it really that simple? I don’t know how many times authors have slipped things in their books to this affect. People trying to understand and explain away how a decent person could support Trump so that they can justify not demonizing them in their book like they would want to. When did the whole ‘don’t judge’ bit start excluding supposed Trump supporters from this protection? I think we all know people are far more than their ballots.



Conclusion

Overall I was disappointed in the book because it wasn’t what I was expecting. I wanted more information about Joy and Alaska and life as a female trucker on the most dangerous road.

I wanted pictures. I had to google so much. I wish she had included pictures of what they saw and of Joy if that’s really the purpose of writing this book.

I’m not saying avoid this book. I just think you need to know what you’re going into from the start.

If this book speaks to you in terms of domestic violence and abuse, then I would also recommend the book Is it Abuse?: A Biblical Guide to Identifying Domestic Abuse and Helping Victims.

You may have heard the word ‘deconstruction.’ It refers to people who question their faith in Christianity and ultimately walk away from it. They may become atheists or they may piece together a newfound faith that for all intents and purposes, has essentially rejected major Christian doctrines.

You may be surprised to know that this book is not a persuasion to stop deconstructing.

Christianity can handle hard questions.

True faith does not come from always accepting what other people tell you, never asking questions, and resisting all doubts.

True faith comes from asking questions, finding answers, and knowing what you believe.

The heart of this book is to encourage anyone who is thinking about deconstructing, in the throes of deconstruction, or talking with loved ones who are, to ask your questions and honestly seek the answers.

“Deconstructing can be the road toward reconstructing—building a more mature, robust faith that grapples honestly with the deepest questions of life.”

It is also a charge to churches to be a safe place for people to deconstruct. A place they are comfortable with asking questions without fear of judgement or condemnation. Churches have far too often been the catalyst for people’s deconstruction and we need to remember Jesus’ message of grace. Teaching truth is not void of grace and kindness.

Scripture says that it’s God’s kindness that leads us to repentance. Not harsh judgments, clucking tongues, anger, or fear. (Rom. 2:4)

Before You Lose Your Faith is similar to Tim Keller’s Uncommon Ground: Living Faithfully in a World of Difference in that both have a different contributor for each chapter. They include, Trevin Wax, Jared Wilson, Rachel Gilson, Thaddeus Williams, and more.

I think this is a great introductory book to read if you are having any doubts about your faith.


Part 1- Deconstructing Deconstruction

The first few chapters challenge those who put Christianity through the gauntlet of questions and doubt to do the same thing to whatever ‘new religion’ they may deconstruct to.

“Is it possible you’ve merely traded one set of unproven assumptions for another?”

They challenge whether ‘progressive Christianity’ really offers belonging and depth. This involves a discussion of wokeness, cancel culture, and Moralistic Therapeutic Deism.

They also interestingly pose that keeping the faith is more radical and countercultural than the trend of deconstruction. Doubt is equated with heroism in today’s culture.

Be radical, they say, and have faith in what you cannot see.

“It is not for us to stop believing because we lack understanding, or to postpone believing till we can get understanding, but to believe in order that we may understand; as Augustine said, ‘unless you believe, you will not understand.’ Faith first, sight afterwards, is God’s order, not vice versa; and the proof of the sincerity of our faith is our willingness to have it so.” - J.I. Packer, Fundamentalism and the Word of God

Lastly, they challenge us to disentangle culture from truth. Culture is always affecting us. This involves a discussion of evangelical subculture and what things have become synonymous with what it means to be Christian that are actually not biblical. Sticking with Christianity doesn’t necessarily mean you must accept the entire package full of cultural adaptations.


Part 2- Deconstruct the Issues

These next chapters hit on all the main topics that are commonly brought up in deconstruction: sex/gender, race, politics, social justice, science, and hell.

I won’t rehash them each here (I’ll include further reading on these at the end of this review), but the main theme throughout these chapters was to address the lies or myths about those issues and to show what the Bible and Jesus actually says about them.

One thing I really liked about this section was one writer who pointed out that discerning truth is not like a pendulum. If people experience a version of Christianity that leaves them hurt or with a bad taste in their mouth, they swing away from anything those people believe. But,

“Wisdom isn’t merely running in the opposite direction of those we dislike."

In a culture filled with tribalism, careful thinking and consideration of other views are rare. If we don’t like someone, then we avoid everything they stand for.

But pendulums keep swinging.

If we truly want answers we have to be willing to walk the road and honestly look for answers and not jump in the ditches when we run into someone we don’t like.

Another thing I really liked about this section was another writer’s distinction that we can deconstruct with hammers or with precise tools.

“Deconstructing with hammers is quick and easy. But it’s also reckless. The resulting mess leaves us with little from which to reconstruct anything of substance. Deconstructing with precise tools, meanwhile, is much more methodical. It’s rarely as quick and easy as the hammer. But we retain the materials needed to reconstruct something of substance in the end.”

This is very wise. I’ve seen a lot of people take the easy way and just destroy everything they ever believed out of their pain and anger, only to be left standing in a pile of rubble and no plans to rebuild. His point was that the internet encourages hammer deconstruction, but wisdom seeks out trustworthy mentors who won’t send you on an aimless path of wreckage merely for the sake of destruction but can give you tools to find the weaknesses in your beliefs and fix them.


Part 3- Reconstruct Faith

It is said, the church is not a museum of saints, it’s a hospital for sinners. That doesn’t excuse the harms done in Jesus’ name, but it reminds us that the only perfection that has existed on earth is Jesus. We continue to strive for holiness, but we’re going to mess up.

I love Scott Sauls’ illustration in his book, A Gentle Answer:

“In the same way that it would make zero sense to call Beethoven a substandard composer because a six-year-old plays a Beethoven piece sloppily and out of tune at a piano recital, it makes zero sense to call Jesus a substandard Savior because his followers imitate him poorly.”

It really boils down to what you think about Jesus. Jesus and his claims for himself, his death, and resurrection, are what Christianity hinges on. Unfortunately, we don’t always follow his example and commands and we hurt people. Maybe you’ve been hurt by a church or someone who identifies as a Christian and you don’t want anything to do with Christianity.

Before you you reject your faith because of other people stumbling along like six-year-olds playing Beethoven, look at the original Composer. Study Jesus.

“In the person of Jesus, those hungering for righteousness see his justice. Those thirsty for compassion see One who will not break a bent reed. Those battling doubt meet One who hears prayers to help our unbelief without judgment or shame. And those perplexed with confusion over the complexities of life, and the fear of being lied to yet again, come face to face with the only One who is faithful and true.”

I read one review of this book that critiqued that it seemed they ‘dismissed’ all the objections of Christianity by saying, in effect, ‘If that’s your experience or belief of Christianity then that wasn’t real Christianity.’ To that reviewer, it seemed like a cop-out.

I disagree with this assessment. I wish it weren’t true that Christianity is distorted in so many ways now and in history past. But that’s what happened/s. It is not wrong to point out the ways in which Christianity has been distorted from God’s design. If we are promoting biblical Christianity, then we need to expose where people have strayed from the Bible. Again, it doesn’t excuse sin, but a book that is trying to show truth must also expose untruths.


Conclusion

This book is not an exhaustive resource on all the questions and doubts you have with the church and anyone who is deconstructing will definitely to read more than this. (Check out my references below for further study.)

But it is a heartfelt and valuable book that poses important questions and considerations for those who are on the deconstruction spectrum.

I had my own experience of ‘deconstruction’ when I went to a Christian college expecting to agree with everyone and realized there were things I believed that I didn’t know why. So I asked questions and I read a lot of books and I studied the Bible and my faith is stronger for it.

I love books like this that encourage others to underwrite their beliefs. Too many people won’t put the work in and act as if they’ve walked a hard road. Walking away completely is easy. But you’re no better off.

Put in the work, walk the road of discovery, and I promise— God will meet you there.

God is not afraid of our questions. Christianity will withstand the weight of your doubt.


More Quotes:

“To be fair in your pursuit of truth, you should take those doubts and questions that you, with laser-focus, have trained on Christianity and point them at the story you’ve adopted for yourself. Until now, your faith in yourself and in deconstruction has escaped the level of intense scrutiny that you put your earlier Christian faith through. If you truly deconstruct in a way that is authentic and honest, then your newfound faith must undergo the same level of examination as your older faith.”

“We want all of God’s blessings— without submitting to his loving rule and reign. We want progress— without his presence. We want justice— without his justification. We want the horizontal implications of the gospel for society— without the vertical reconciliation of sinners with God. We want society to conform to our standard of moral purity— without God’s standard of personal holiness.”

“Yes, God is a mystery. But he can also be known. He is known in Jesus. He is known in the pages of Scripture. And when we seek him with all of our heart, we will find him.”

“Freedom isn’t the absence of constraints. Jesus didn’t say “total, limitless autonomy will set you free. He said the truth will set you free. Not your truth; the truth, in a true-for-everyone sense.”

“Politics is just like any other idol: it doesn’t deliver what it promises. That’s why many of the most politically conscious people you know are also the most anxious, the most fearful, the most volatile. The idol of politics promises a feeling of control over this intimidating world. In reality, though, it amplifies fear by keeping our eyes off the Sovereign ruler of history.”

“Abandoning Christ won’t make your politics more tolerant and sophisticated. What it will do, in all likelihood, is surrender you to the whims of a secular outrage and cancel culture that is ruthless and unforgiving. It’ll leave you without a moral foundation. Worst of all, it’ll rob you of the only hope steady enough to survive deep suffering, unmet expectations, shattered dreams, powerful enemies, and broken trust. Only. Christ is big enough to assure you of ultimate hope, because only Christ is big enough to one day undo everything broken about this world.”

“We must learn that Christian community is built, not found.”

“Unfortunately, many of my friends who’ve left the faith haven’t found what they were looking for. In search of freedom, they’ve found only bondage to a lifeless system of individualism, consumerism, and a new, secular judgmentalism… We were made for this: belonging to Christ and one another. Every other system, every other promise, everything else in this world is crushing.”

“The good news of the gospel is that the Savior invites us into his city. The king loves to pardon. The Lamb desires to forgive. The Great Physician rejoices to heal.”


Further Reading:

- Born Again This Way: Coming Out, Coming to Faith, and What Comes Next by Rachel Gilson (Contributor)— Gender/Sexuality/Marriage

- Confronting Injustice without Compromising Truth: 12 Questions Every Christian Should Ask about Social Justice by Thaddeus Williams (Contributor)— Race/Social Justice

- The Imperfect Disciple: Grace for People Who Can’t Get Their Act Together by Jared Wilson— Doubt

- What Does the Bible Really Teach about Homosexuality? by Kevin DeYoung—Sexuality

- What Does God Say About Our Bodies? by Sam Allberry— Gender/Sexuality

- How the Nations Rage: Rethinking Faith and Politics in a Divided Age by Jonathan Leeman— Politics

- Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism’s Looming Catastrophe by Voddie Bacuham Jr.— Race/Social Justice

- Surviving Religion 101: Letters to a Christian Student on Keeping the Faith in College by Michael J. Kruger— Gender/Race/Authority and Inerrancy of Scripture

- Finding the Right Hills to Die on: The Case for Theological Triage by Gavin Ortlund— Areas of Disagreement in Christianity

-Confronting Christianity: 12 Hard Questions for the World’s Largest Religion by Rebecca McLaughlin— All the above

- Taking God at His Word: Why the Bible is Knowable, Necessary, and Enough, and What that Means for You and Me by Kevin DeYoung— Trusting the Bible

- The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism by Timothy Keller— Existence of God

[Would have been 4 stars if not for the f-words]

“She hadn’t thought that perhaps houses hold on to the bad with the good, just as people do.”

My first thought while reading this book was that it was reminiscent of the Netflix movie ‘The Weekend Away’: two friends get away together in a foreign country, one is responsible and going through a rough patch in marriage, the other is an unreliable free spirit with love problems. Something bad happens and the main protagonist (the responsible one) has to figure out what’s going on. (And a couple more things that would be spoilers)

One thing that made this book different than The Weekend Away is that the Italian (rather than Croatian) villa Emily and her friend, Chess, are staying in has a haunted past. Decades ago a high profile murder occurred in that very house.

The first line of the book is “Houses remember.”

It’s telling.

Emily is an unhappy author, tired of writing cozy mysteries with characters based on her life that’s currently falling apart, and finally, in Croatia, is inspired to write about what happened in the house all those years ago. Her discoveries reveal hidden secrets, both old and new, and the house may claim another victim.


The book goes back and forth between past and present.

Present: Emily and Chess navigate their complicated friendship as they each invest time in writing their own books, intrigued by the horrors of the past.

“How is it that someone can bring out the very best and the very worst of you all at once?”

Past: Writer Mari, her musician boyfriend Pierce, and musician stepsister Lara, are invited by famous musician Noel Gordon to his luxurious villa in Italy. A summer of music, sex, and drugs result in one murder and two artistic masterpieces.

The story goes: “A musician beaten to death by some lowlife, in an argument that got out of control because everyone involved was high out of their minds.”

But what really happened?



First, in case I’ve given you the wrong impression— this is not a paranormal book. The house is not its an active and haunting entity.

Second, I had a good deal of it figured out, mostly because I had just watched that movie (which is completely unrelated, btw).

Third, the ‘past’ timeline is light on music and heavy on the sex and drugs. There is also a lot of language.

Fourth, it’s possible it’s just my digital copy, but the flow was a little confusing at times with jumping back and forth, plus there are excerpts from the book Mari was writing during her timeline. So parts of it felt disjointed.

Fifth, the characters were largely unlikable. Maybe some like Mari, but she was kinda a home-wrecker and blind not to see that her boyfriend was a selfish douche. Chess is the wild friend trope that annoys me and gives me anxiety. Of all the characters Emily is the most likable, but she’s got her own issues too.

It’s one of those thrillers that’s mysterious because it’s dysfunctional.

Of all the things, the third thing holds the most weight for me. The first thing is a positive. The second thing lowers my rating a little bit but I liked that there was a ‘mystery’ in both timelines and I’m not sure if the ‘answers’ were obvious or if I just got lucky with my recent movie choice.— plus I liked the ending. The fourth and fifth things aren’t major problems in terms of mystery and suspense but takes down the ‘pleasure’ aspect of reading it.


Recommendation

This was a highly anticipated book for 2023. I have not read Hawkins before. I may read another one of hers. Her book The Wife Upstairs was nominated for best mystery/thriller in 2021. But if all of her books have 100 f-words, I won’t be reading any more.

This is one that’s hard for me to give a recommendation on.

I think there are people who will really like it, but there’s some content that will put others off. I guess if you’re on the fence about it, I would say to just skip it. There’s plenty of books to read out there, better not to waste your time if you’re not sure.


[Content Advisory: 100 f-words, 53 s-words, a couple c-words, implied sex, including a threesome]

**Received an ARC via NetGalley**

Shelf Reflection Book Review Blog
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest

“No matter who Hansel is, if I ever encounter him again, I’ll have a fighting chance. And if it’s a copycat, I have no doubt I’ll win. It’s what I do.”


Wow, this was a really gripping psychological thriller!

I had a hard time putting it down. I always told myself one more chapter, but they’re so short I ended up reading several more every time.

The only thing keeping this book from ‘must-read’ status is that there is quite a bit of language.


The first chapter reads: “According to my former therapist, the chance of falling victim to a serial killer is .00039 percent. The chance of being the victim of a serial killer twice is so small as to be… nearly impossible.”

Well Norah is the ‘lucky’ one.


Here’s a brief summary and some other comments:

Brief Synopsis

The main character is Norah. She and her friend, August, were kidnapped by a serial killer (nicknamed Hansel because his MO involved ‘breadcrumbs’) on prom night. Norah watched her friend die but managed to escape in a surprising way.

The killer was never caught.

Norah lives a somewhat paranoid life and had to escape Kansas because of it. She landed in LA where she became a successful MMA fighter and coach.

Her dad’s sudden death brings her back to Kansas where her past catches up to her and more people close to her start dying in similar ways to a decade before.

Hansel wants her back.

Can she figure out who it is before more people die? And can she use her newfound fighting skills to finally end the anxiety and paranoia and get rid of Hansel once and for all?


Comments

Norah’s character reminded me a lot of Nina Guerrera, Warrior Girl, from Isabella Maldonado’s series (beginning with The Cipher). Nina also escaped from a killer when she was young and knows he’s still out there. They both grow up in careers that enable them to keep their vow- Never to be a victim again.

I really liked this book and the Guerrera series so the similarities are a positive thing.


My first guess of who the killer was was wrong. My second, also wrong. My third, correct. Even though I figured it out, it was okay. The suspense was definitely still there and there were times I questioned. I think if the killer is a surprise out of left field it probably meant the clues weren’t really there for the reader to follow and that’s sometimes not as fun!


I think my biggest criticism of the book (other than language) is the premise that she didn’t tell the cops ‘everything’ that happened the night she got away. That there was something she had to keep hidden or didn’t want people to know about.

The prologue reveals how she escaped. She convinced him that she loved him and she would return. But there were still comments throughout the book making it seem like there was something else to be revealed about that night. Unless I missed something there was never something else. This was it. And we know it immediately.

Which is fine, it didn’t necessarily need something else, but then don’t play it up like it’s going to be a big reveal in the end. Because then it feels like the author forgot something.


I also felt like the parts describing her actual encounter with the serial killer were pretty short so the trauma she lives with after the fact doesn’t feel as visceral because the reader’s vision of the encounter seems too shallow. We didn’t really get to understand what Norah means when she says, “she doesn’t know what it’s like to stare into the eyes of someone who enjoys, no relishes— the thought of killing you.”

Not that I wanted a graphic account by any means, but even her friend’s killing happened in a matter of a few sentences.


Then there were the two stupid things:
- Once Janie went missing, Detective Cron didn’t take it seriously, which considering the murder of their friend days prior and their suspicions that Norah’s dad was drugged, you would think they would want to investigate that a bit.
- When you find out who the killer is, and that they drugged people, best not to drink anything they give you…

There is also the fact that reporters and journalists are just THE WORST. I have yet to read anything involving them that makes me think they’re decent people. At least in the fiction world. All they want is the big story and the next promotion. Prove me wrong.


Recommendation

Even though I had a few criticisms, I would still recommend this book because of how hard it was to put down. That’s how a thriller should be.

If you can look past the language and the one oversell, then I think you’ll really like this book!

And if you like this one, definitely check out Maldonado’s series!

Jessica Payne also wrote a book called ‘Make Me Disappear’ that I’m tempted to read now.



[Content Advisory: 65 f-words, 43 s-words, 27 uses of God’s name in vain, an LGBTQ relationship between two characters]

**Received an ARC via NetGalley**

Shelf Reflection Book Review Blog
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest

“At one time I had all the conveniences. But in the end, it has been the inconveniences that have mattered to me most.”


I was worried I would be bored with this book, but it was a very enjoyable read!

It was wise; it was mischievous, endearing, engaging; and it was meaningful.

It was nominated for the Goodreads Choice Awards in 2016 for Best Historical Fiction and rightly so.

Covering a span of many years, we are audience to the life of a man kept captive for more than half of his life in a hotel in Moscow. How does a man handle his house arrest and how does that man find purpose?

There is much to ponder and I think it would make a good book club discussion (see my questions at the end).


Brief Summary

The Count (Alexander Rostov) has written a poem undermining the principles of the new Bolshevik government in Moscow after the revolution. He has been sentenced to house arrest in the Metropol Hotel. If he steps foot outside the hotel, he will be shot.

The Count comes from a wealthy family and under Bolshevik rule, the aristocrats are the enemy.

Moved from his luxurious apartment to a small attic space, Rostov must endure his punishment for many years.

Over the years we see him interact with hotel employees and guests and create relationships. We see the ups and downs of captivity. A near suicide attempt, loss, mischief, and merriment.


What I Loved

First of all, I love the cover. It is just so fitting. It is exactly how I picture the Count standing and observing the world outside. The hands clasped, the placement of his feet. He is the true picture of a gentleman in Moscow! Although I would have liked to view his moustaches.

The unique thing about this book is that there is no driving plot. Most historical fiction has some sort of mission or focuses on an aspect of a war or an event. There is a problem, a conflict, and a hero.

But A Gentleman in Moscow’s problem is quite simple: Rostov is under house arrest. What now? Of course the revolution is happening, WWII happens, and much political unrest. But Rostov is relatively untouched by it all in his isolation.

The book focuses on Rostov and his experiences. The question at play is: How does a man find purpose in such a predicament?

And so we see him forge friendships. We see him help others better themselves or achieve their dreams.

It almost reads like a TV series. We have a main character and a series of vignettes with somewhat separate themes. Characters come and go but the overarching storyline of the main character carries through.

Rostov is such a likable character! From the first you know he is a gentleman because he does not enter his captivity with bitterness, rage, or revenge. He accepts it and decides to make the most of it. He is wise, logical, practical. Mind over matter.

And in all he maintains wit, charm, and mischief.

My favorite character interaction he has is with the young girl Nina. They become partners in crime, exploring the hidden places of the hotel. Eavesdropping. Playing games.

She is bold and curious and thoughtful. She challenges the Count in many ways and he rises to the task. It is a sweet grandfatherly relationship and I love the verbal jousting they get into!

I also loved the message of the book. Or at least what I took to be the message. This book was about Rostov finding his purpose within his constraints. And we see that it involved other people. It became a somewhat selfless existence. There wasn’t much he could do for himself. But he invested in others.

As the quote I put at the top says- what ended up mattering to him most were ‘the inconveniences.’ And I think that is a profound and wise thing to say.

We have a plan of how we want our lives to go. We envision the trajectory of our lives, our goals. We ask- where do you see yourself in ten years? And of course as the years go, our plans feel fairly worthless or juvenile. There are ‘inconveniences’ that turn our lives around.

But when our perspective is outward focused instead of inward focused, we realize that people are important. And relationships with people, helping people, seeing people, investing in people. Those are highly meaningful things. ‘Inconveniences’ become the things most memorable or the things that most fully made us who we are.

Rostov’s punishment becomes enlightenment. He loses much to find he has gained much.

Purpose is people. Purpose is outward not inward. Purpose is limitless.


A Few Critiques

My first critique is that some of it was hard to follow. Because it covered such a large span of time, it was somewhat hard to keep the timeline in order. Some chapters began with a year marker, but especially if you read the book over a period of several days, it’s hard to remember what year you’re in and what has transpired.

There is also the Russian aspects— language and references— that complicate things. I’m sure I didn’t get all the meanings Towles was implying with the references. This seems like a book with many layers and because I’m not super familiar with Russian history/politics/economics/literature, I think I missed a lot of the symbolism or parallels. (And I haven’t seen Casablanca so that aspect was probably lost on me.)


Bonus Comments

Somehow it took me halfway through the book before I realized that all the chapter titles were words beginning with the letter ‘A.’ I’m not sure if there is significance to that but it was fun to notice.

In case you’re confused by the names, Sasha is short for Alexander and Mishka is a popular nickname for the name Mikhail.

At one point they note the temperature and it was in Fahrenheit. Shouldn’t it have been Celsius?

The game he played with Sofia in hiding the thimble I had to laugh at the rules being the counter counting to 200! When I play hide and seek with my kids I’m lucky if I get 20 seconds. 200 seconds is definitely too long of a window to hide a thimble in a tiny room.

A triumvirate is an ancient Roman term meaning: a group of three men holding power. And I love that Rostov calls his friendship with Emile and Andrey a triumvirate. So often it felt like the Count was a young boy in his own little adventure, imagination running wild in the midst of boredom!

I got extreme anxiety when they recount the incident of removing labels from thousands of bottles of wine. I just can’t imagine the insanity that would lead someone to do such a ridiculous thing. I don’t know why but every time I think about it, I get very upset. There’s probably something existential to consider there, but I can’t handle it so I’m just going to move on.


Conclusion

I definitely recommend this book. It is not going to be a fast-paced thriller or a complex plotted work of fiction, but it is very engaging and has a lot to ponder. The characters become our friends and it is a sad moment when we reach the end and realize we must say good-bye.

And if it encourages you to pick up the book at all, this is being released this year (2023) on Paramount+ and Showtime either as a movie or a limited series. Ewan McGregor is to play Alexander (which isn’t really who I picture… I think I picture someone more like Jude Law, Russell Crowe, or Michael Caine or whoever plays Hercule Poirot)

I’ll update with a comparison and review once I watch it. I’m excited to see the Metropol come to life!


Some Great Quotes

“The Count hadn’t the temperament for revenge; he hadn’t the imagination for epics; and he certainly hadn’t the fanciful ego to dream of empires restored. No. His model for mastering his circumstances would be a different sort of captive altogether” an Anglican washed ashore… the Count would maintain his resolve by committing to the business of practicalities.”

“Rather than being tools of self-discovery, mirrors tended to be tools of self-deceit.”

“A gentleman’s presence was best announced by his bearing, his remarks, and his manners. Not by the cut of his coat.”

“The only difference between everybody and nobody is all the shoes.”

“What can a first impression tell us about anyone? Why, no more than a chord can tell us about Beethoven, or a brushstroke about Botticelli. By their very nature, human beings are so capricious, so complex, so delightfully contradictory, that they deserve not only our consideration, but our reconsideration— and our unwavering determination to withhold our opinion until we have engaged with them in every possible setting at every possible hour.”

“Surely, the span of time between the placing of an order and the arrival of appetizers is one of the most perilous in all human interaction… What husband and wife have not found themselves suddenly unnerved by the fear that they might never have something urgent, impassioned, or surprising to say to each other again?”

“What matters in life is not whether we receive a round of applause; what matters is whether we have the courage to venture forth despite the uncertainty of acclaim.”


Book Club Discussion Questions

I think this book would make a great book club book. Here are some questions I came up with to help spur discussion:

1. What makes a gentleman?
2. What do you think the meaning of the book is?
3. What does it mean to be a person of purpose?
4. What do you think was the hardest part of house arrest for the Count?
5. If you were under house arrest for years of your life, where would you want to be held and how would you pass your time?
6. Which of Alexander’s character interactions was your favorite?
7. What were the differences between Nina and her daughter Sofia and how did those differences influence the trajectory of their lives?
8. What changes do you see in the Count from the beginning to the end?
9. Do you think it would have added to the story or taken away if Towles had chosen to include more of the WWII and political happenings in the book?
10. The Count left his belongings several times in this book— what of your possessions would be the hardest to leave behind indefinitely?
11. What do you think the Count’s political leanings were and why? (socialist, communist, democratic, etc)
12. Why do you think the Count did not harbor any bitterness at his situation, especially considering what led him to it?
13. Why do you think Alexander and Anna hit it off so well?
14. Why do you think Alexander returned to his estate at the end?
15. Was the ending satisfactory to you? What would you have done differently?
16. How did the Count find purpose? How do you find purpose?
17. The book covers a large time span— do you feel like the Count aged at all?
18. What was the significance of the movie Casablanca in the book?
19. The book quotes- ‘All poetry is a call to action’— have you ever been influenced to action by the written word? How so?

Shelf Reflection Book Review Blog
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest

“The Bethlehem star is, without doubt, the most famous and celebrated astronomical entity in history. No other celestial object captures the attention of the world like it.”

The star that led the Magi to worship Jesus.

How did it happen? Can it be explained?

Before I read this book I think I would have fallen into the camp of- I guess it was just a miracle star that God put in the sky. I hadn’t really thought about it much. It wasn’t something that necessarily mattered to me.

But now that I’ve read this detailed and compelling book, I have changed my belief about the star.

Nicholl first explores all the most popular theories regarding the star: “was it a planet, a nova or supernova, a comet, a miraculous phenomenon, or something else?”

In order to investigate this, Nicholl emphasizes that it requires the interdisciplinary cooperation between both astronomy and theology.

He states:

“In this book I offer what I am convinced is the solution to the age-old mystery of the Star of Bethlehem… rooted in a careful consideration of the relevant biblical material and is, I believe, able to explain everything said about the Star in a natural and compelling way and in harmony with current astronomical knowledge.”


It must be said at the outset that Nicholl is not presenting his case as if it is a fact that can be proven but rather a pretty convincing possible explanation that can be supported in a lot of ways. This is not a salvation issue and so we are allowed freedom of conscience in this area and can disagree lovingly.

Nicholl spent a decade of his life studying and researching for this book, communicating with some of the foremost astronomers and theologians. What he puts forth is not a willy-nilly conspiracy theory but a fascinating and historical account.


I will also say at the outset that this is not a light read. It’s a beautiful book with a hard cover, glossy pages, and color pictures, but the two columned text and detailed footnotes do make it read like a textbook.

I hope that he puts out a more condensed version because I think a lot of people won’t give this one a chance or find it too cumbersome.


I found it really interesting but it did feel too long and repetitive in parts. Not to mention there was quite a bit of technical language or charts or sections that I was just not going to understand. I am planning to link some videos at the end of this review that he’s put out to make sure I understood what I was supposed to and to get some visuals. Even with all the pictures, it is hard to visualize the 3D reality of what he describes especially considering the different planes that earth and the comet orbited on and the spinning of the earth, etc.


The Scripture passages he draws heavily from are:

- Matthew 2
- Revelations 12: 1-5
- Numbers 24:17
- Psalm 2:8-9
- Isaiah 7-12; 60: 1-6


I think my favorite chapters were ‘The Celestial Wonder’ and ‘Tracking the Comet'. The former talks about some astronomical things that are pretty amazing in conjunction with the Revelation passage. The latter helps understand the possible course of the comet and the timing of the Magi’s travels and visit to Jesus which is the relevant ‘Nativity’ aspect that many theories differ on.


I’m obviously not the best person to try to summarize this book but based on my amateur reading, here are a few of the main things I gathered from the book that I felt were significant.

The questions that must be asked are: what made this star so special or unique that it would have gotten the Magi’s attention and triggered them to travel hundreds of miles to worship a baby? And what would have happened to cause Herod to be so worried about Jesus and to take the Magi’s visit so seriously if he hadn’t also seen what the Magi saw and knew it to be significant?

Nicholl proposes that this long-period comet (aka unlike Halley’s comet that visits every 75 years) would have likely been visible for over a year (which is similar to the Halle-Bopp comet which was visible for 18 months.)

The Magi would have seen the comet appear “at its rising” (appearing after being obscured from the sun— it rises in the east in conjunction with the sun and is at it’s most productive, brightest, largest point) and been keeping an eye on it.

Thus, they would have seen it on the move throughout the constellations. Based on the time of year and a bunch of astronoical data, the comet would have been coming toward earth in the ‘womb’ of the constellation Virgo (the virgin).

This is where the Revelations passage comes into play. Nicholl poses that these verses are highlighting the “celestial drama” that was playing out in the sky as it was on earth— the virgin (Virgo) giving birth to a king (the comet). The path of the comet would have been getting closer, larger, and brighter, appearing to descend out the womb as if being birthed.

[Sidenote: I thought it was weird how he kept taking about the vaginal opening as if it was such an obvious point in the constellation. Some of his description of this phenomenon was possibly too detailed, but I understood what he was getting at]

Also part of this celestial play is the constellation Hydra which is right next to Virgo. Based on the Revelation passage, Hydra is the part of Satan waiting to ‘devour’ the child and ‘sending a third of the stars to earth)— a meteor storm.

All of this would truly be a sight to behold and a hard sign to miss!


Even though astrology as a belief system is a myth, it’s cool that God would have put these signs in the heavens (from Creation) to play out in a way that the people would have understood and interpreted as a sign ushering in the Messiah.

The Magi, most likely aware of the prophecies and having gained insight from the local Jewish community, would have helped them to interpret the celestial happenings as significant and the precursor to Jesus’ birth. Their gifts of gold and frankincense (Isaiah 60) and myrrh (Isaiah 53) “imply that by the time they arrived in Judea, they believed that the one whom they were going to see was royal and divine, and yet was destined to be killed and buried.”

They would not have waited long to travel. Their journey would have taken about 30ish days. And so they would have most likely seen a 1-2 month old baby Jesus.

Herod would have been worried because the brightness and activity of the comet would have been seen by Herod and all of Jerusalem and in those times comets were often bad omens to kings of their death or loss of power. When the Magi came to him it was confirming his worst fears. But because he ascertained the time from the Magi of when they first saw the star (which could have been over a year) Herod then planned to kill babies 2 and under based on the potentiality that the child was born when the star first appeared.


As I was reading this book it became very apparent how little I actually knew about space stuff. I started to question if even knew what a comet was.

Fear not, he goes into much detail about what a comet is (an icy dirtball) and the various characteristics and measurements of comets. How when a comet comes into contact with the sun, the sun burns the gases of the comet’s head (the coma) causing its brightness and creating the ‘tail’ of the comet (which is always on the opposite side of the sun no matter which direction the comet is going).

Based on our knowledge of astronomy, most of the other theories of the star can be ruled out because either they don’t match up with Matthew’s account and timing of Jesus’ birth, or because they can’t do what this star did— like move from the eastern to the southern sky in a matter of a couple months or appear suddenly and for a long period of time.


I’m sure my brief summary has brought up questions or doubts from you, which is natural. But if it interests you, check out the book and you’ll see everything that he studied to come to these conclusions.

And if Nicholl’s conclusion is actually how it happened, it definitely even surpasses the idea of a ‘miracle’ star that God just randomly put in the sky. God’s sovereignty and power is clearly at display in this book and it reminds me how small I am and how big God is.


Another reason why this matters is because, as Collin states in one of the videos, “it underlines the historical reliability of the Gospel because no one could have invented such an unusual star.” Scripture tells us that the heavens declare the glory of God and in one of the most important times of history— God coming to earth, our Savior King— the heavens did pour forth speech in a spectacular way. It’s more evidence to support the reliability and historicity of Scripture.


Did I fully comprehend everything I read? No. The glossary in the back was helpful and I am very aware of what heliacal means, but there is much I’m sure I didn’t grasp. Can I prove anything he wrote wrong? Also no.

I can’t think of a good reason why he would go through all the work and effort and years of studying and writing this book if he knew he couldn’t intelligently defend it. Unless he’s insane. And based on its promotion by many other scholars in both theology and astronomy and my own take having read the book and watched videos of him presenting— he is not insane.

If someone puts forth compelling evidence to contradict his conclusions, I will listen and think about it, but until then I will not let my lack of astronomical knowledge and reactionary disbelief/surprise keep me from believing him.

I find this book compelling and trustworthy, yet I also know we will never on this side of heaven exactly what happened so there will always be an aspect of speculation. And that’s okay.


This book brings new life and perspective to the Nativity story that we’re all so familiar with. I would recommend this book if you’re interested in learning more about that. If you’re too intimidated by the length or technicality, keep an eye out for a condensed version or at least watch the videos because I think you’ll find them really interesting to think about!


My original blog post has the aforementioned video links.


Shelf Reflection Book Review Blog
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest

[3.5 stars rounded down because of a mostly arbitrary rating system I'm trying to stay consistent with but you have no way of evaluating.]

“I am old, but I am alive.”

I have never read anything by Laurie Notaro before but she’s written several books, so you may be a fan.

I’m always up for a funny book. Granted these days it’s hard to find one without crass language and a ton of swearing. This book had 13 f-words and 44 s-words, and some, uh, detailed descriptions of arguably gross things.

I feel like I have to somewhat compare this book to Jenny Lawson’s book, Broken. They both had swearing and some crassness but I think I enjoyed Lawson’s book better.

I think the reason is because this book is about life after 50 which I have not yet achieved. There were definitely still things I could relate to, which I’ll talk about in a second, but in a lot of ways this book felt like a little bit TMI.

She divulges all the pros and cons of getting older. The difficulties of going gray. The perks of becoming invisible and therefore able to shoplift a bag of potatoes. The discomfort of going to the doctor. And more.

Plus her last chapter is a heartfelt tribute to her dog who is in the last stages of life. Dog-owners/lovers may have special attachments to that chapter.

“There are two old ladies living in my house, and neither one of us can figure out how we got here. One lives in a quiet, blurry fog, and the other watches, hoping that she can stretch time, wield it in some way that is impossible.”

So while most of it is meant to be funny, she does throw in some serious, existential bits regarding the end of life and such.


If you are a male I would definitely consider passing on this one unless you want to hear details about lady doctor visits and other lady things. It may make you uncomfortable.

If you are a female, especially over 50, this book may cause you to throw your hands up and say, ‘Preach woman’ because she just really gets you and all your new bodily dysfunctions.

If you are a female under 50 you may chuckle nervously and think, ‘Can’t wait til this may or may not happens to me’ or ‘Crap, this happened to me yesterday, I’m closer to 50 than I thought!’ Both of which may be too much for our precious thirties hearts right now.

So yes, a very niche book. Not for everyone.


The Relatable

“I’ve seen so much stuff that I had to purge 90 percent of my childhood memories from my brain in order to make room for passwords and PINs.”

Whoever uses different passwords for each place has got to be clinically insane. I’m actually surprised my identity hasn’t been stolen yet. Just my husband’s. Also I’m not willing to give up my childhood memories so I’ve settled on the short-term memory loss of wherever the heck my phone is at any given minute.


“I still call everyone ‘dude.’”

Dude. Me too.


“I order kids’ meals at restaurants, and the server just nods without question. Old lady. Little appetite, if she even lives through the meal.”

I can just picture myself eating chicken nuggets while workers side-eye me and wonder if they need to call 911.


“This manual for your disintegrating body will hopefully answer some questions you’ve had for a while— Hod do I get up off the floor? What was that popping noise? Should I call my doctor or my life insurance agent first? Do I have to shop at Chico’s now?”

A very practical list of questions. However, after three pregnancies, I am very resourceful when it comes to the first one and well-versed in the art of crawling to the nearest stable heave-up object. The popping noise is definitely going to be my knees, but if my husband has his way we will be living in a ranch house by then, which according to him is “a house you go to die in.’ Because no stairs. And my knees will have 20 less reasons to pop. I’ll probably call my doctor first because I don’t know who my life insurance agent is— I think that’s for my husband to figure out. And Chico’s? Or is it Talbot’s? I hope I know by then or that could be pretttty embarrassing…


“Yes, your hair is probably thinning. It doesn’t happen to everyone (my friend Jamie never met a drain she couldn’t choke to death with one good brushing)”

It’s me. I’m Jamie. And post-delivery my shower was basically a wig-making factory. Before I agreed to marry my husband I verified that he would be the official and solitary drain cleaner. Best ultimatum I ever gave.


“Basically, after a certain age you can pee anytime. You can pee during a sneeze, a cough, or a nice laugh."

She forgot throwing up. I’m also beginning to notice a pattern that if you’re pregnant or had more than one child, you’re basically middle-aged. When I was pregnant with my twins, my two girls were so used to this scenario that every time I threw up because of morning sickness they asked me- ‘Did you just pee your pants?’ Yes. Yes I did.


“How do I know I am middle-aged?… the first time you see something advertised and really want it, but then you immediately think about ways you could get hurt using it.”

I was just saying the other day that I know I’m getting older because there are certain things that just picturing myself doing makes me feel injured— i.e. doing a cartwheel or jumping off a swing. And in that way I would counter her statement and say that getting older INCREASES your fear. Fear of injury. That may be your only fear. But it is a real and viable fear.


“If I could do it all over again, in 2000, I would have scored the email address 1@gmail.com… Who has 1@gmail.com. and how much do you want for it?”

Ugh. I have to spell out my entire email address every time because people can’t spell very well. So whoever has this email: Whatever Notaro is paying you- I can quarter it!! Drop me a message.


“I’ll buy you a day-of-the-week pillbox if you stop.”

Her incentive to her husband to stop talking about old people things like orthotics, buffets, ointments, and AARP. Again, just recently as my husband and I were popping our numerous pills before bed and I pondered whether I had missed a day of taking one, I mentioned getting a pillbox. But my first memory of those is seeing them on both my grandparents’ kitchen tables and I am not grand enough for it. Sigh. A sign of my times.


“I went downstairs and got a cookie, then decided that I needed something salty to balance it. Ate half a pretzel, but the balance was off again, so ate another cookie.”

This is not a middle-age thing. This is just a fact of life. One must always balance salty and sweet or your entire body chemistry goes haywire. It’s science.


“MINI Cooper.”

It doesn’t matter what the context of these two words were in the book. It is the car that I was obsessed with for many years. And I still have a special place in my heart for these wonders (ahem, Italian Job), but I think you have to either be single or middle-aged to drive one now. Or British.


Other Funnies

I think one of my favorite parts of the book is her regaling us with her Nextdoor.com thread. Because of the ridiculous things her neighbors were posting about (like how dryer fumes were giving everyone cancer), she put out her own post: “Help! People have been walking in front of my house. This must stop. It’s driving my dog crazy.”

The responses. Oh my goodness. Internet comments are just its own literary genre that could be studied for centuries without any logical explanations. We all got words we want to say, but you gotta know when to hold them, know when to fold them. Know when to walk away, know when to run. And notice none of those say ‘type them.’ More often than not, it’s not going to be a good look for you. And your generation will suffer for it.

Her thread is proof.

I was excited the very next day that I read this I received an email with 20 Nextdoor.com notifications. I eagerly browsed through them for the first time in all my life hoping for some madness I could be party to. Unfortunately all of them were just lost pets and coyote sightings. And since I still have my Christmas lights up I don’t think I’m allowed to post anything.

But when I’m an empty nester I could totally see myself finding entertainment on neighborhood pages with sarcasm and fake complaints. If my husband lets me.


My second favorite part is all of her quotes from: “My mother, who wishes to remain anonymous”


And here are a few other quotes that made me laugh:

- “‘For growing up in Arizona, you barely have any sun damage,’ she exclaimed, and at that I finally exhaled. ‘In 1981, punk rock happened, and we all went inside,’ I informed her.”

- “Everyone in Arizona has skin cancer. It’s so common that it should really appear on the license plate instead of a cactus.”

- “I bet it’s going to take a chunky woman with a big brain, swollen ankles, and a well-funded lab to figure out why losing weight after fifty is like scaling a glacier in flip-flops.”

- “I held out on getting a smart TV because I couldn’t bear the htought of trying to figure out how to work it, and not only work it, but remember how to work it, and that, my friends, was the right thing to do.”

- “I have had a husband for twenty-five years, which is way longer than most successful dictatorships, and my marriage is more complicated and has more moving parts, as you can probably guess.”


Recommendation

I can see how this one was nominated for Best Humor; I wouldn’t say it was a wrongful nomination.

But I’m not sure how often I’ll recommend this one. As I mentioned before, it feels like it’s written for a very specific audience.

For me, it got to be a little too much. Too much detail, and too much ‘mid-life aches and pain’ stuff. Kind of like how I sometimes get tired of Jim Gaffigan constantly making jokes about being fat. It’s funny at first but then you just kinda want them to move on.

Maybe I’ll appreciate it more when I’ve ascended the proper hill?

I’m not going to try to convince anyone to read this book, but if you think you are built for it, by all means, proceed. If you easily cringe or would like to stay naive about your near or not so near future, then you better pass.


(And if you decide not to read it, you should Google her Nextdoor thread. Apparently it had it’s own few minutes of Internet fame.)

Shelf Reflection Book Review Blog
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest

Before reading this book I had never heard of The Happy Rant. This book was recommended by a friend and I’m glad to have discovered them.

The authors (yes Barnabas is Johnny P’s son) have been part of a podcast of the same name for the last several years. They are friends who enjoy giving hot takes on Christian sub-culture and poking fun at the arguably ridiculous things the Christian community does or says. (Think Babylon Bee)

But it’s not entirely satirical and they do offer some thoughtful insights and opinions on a variety of topics. They tackle (because Kluck and football) manliness, movies, fashion, sports, holiday trends, the Enneagram, Christian fiction books, conferences, Reformed stuff and more.

Their goal in all of their writing/podcasts is: “Take Jesus seriously, take our faith seriously, laugh at ourselves, and laugh at the absurdity in so much of Christian (and broader) culture.”


I would suggest before reading this book that you listen to at least one of their podcast episodes to get a feel for their voices and personalities. I would also suggest skipping quick to the section of the book that describes some of their insider lingo/nicknames they use throughout their conversations.

I am a big proponent of nicknames so I give this section a thumbs up.

(Although Ted and Ronnie call each other ‘Baby’— apparently a reference from the 90s movie Swingers. And since I have no idea what this movie is my first thought is probably not what the film is about. And my second thought was that maybe it’s a baseball movie because they love sports. And my third thought was that maybe it’s a boxing movie because also sports. But it’s not any of those. Yet I still don’t know why it has that name and I’m still not sure if I like that particular nickname. It felt very bro-ish reading it.)


I also give a thumbs up to their jabs at the Ennegram and personality tests. They expressed a lot of my thoughts on that.

“I think the word for the day when it comes to personality tests is ‘humility,’ because believing that they create a straight path into the innermost complexities of the soul is treating them a little too much like witchcraft. Which, if you like essential oils and personality tests, is right up your occultism alley.”

“I don’t think there is a version of a personality test that won’t make us selfish and self-centered in about six minutes.”

But I will also point out that they really didn’t mention 1s at all and I want to know why. My best guess is because it’s called The Reformer.


Funny?

So anyway, you must be wondering— is the book funny?

Yes. Yes it is.

I enjoyed the part where they compared previous girlfriends to NBA players. I decided to ask my husband who I would be. He said he’d have to think about it but his first thought was Joakim Noah because “he’s crazy and unorthodox but effective. Also frizzy, floppy, ponytail.”

Their editor’s notes and footnotes were great.

And the overall vibe of the book is just fun and doesn’t take itself too seriously.

At one point they recommend Hot Rod and Nate Bargatze (whom I just saw live this weekend) and that gives me some good insight on their humor. Well. Except for their Steve Martin and Martin Short duo mention. Ugh, Martin Short gets on my nerves.

The guys are pretty transparent about themselves and their thoughts and acknowledging that their opinion may need to be changed. I appreciate their honesty with mostly the right amount of self-deprecation.


It read like a transcript of their podcast. The format is small sections labeled with the author’s initials like dialogue, and it’s a back and forth discussion of sorts.

It’s a super fast read. Which is good because it leaves you wanting more. You want to hear what else they think and what other Rushmores they have. Luckily they have a podcast so there is plenty more where this comes from.

If I was a podcast person, I would listen to them regularly. Instead I’ll just have to go out of my way to check in on them every now and then and see whom/what they’re blasting.


Offense or Defense?

I feel like I’m not easily offended. And if you are, maybe this book isn’t for you, or it is because you need to knock it off! Even as I say I wasn’t offended reading this, I still found myself somewhat defensive at certain times.

I have somehow taken on a subconscious role of ‘defender of Christian stuff’ and I’m realizing that I need to be more open to certain critiques. I love Jesus and I love his church and so whenever someone criticizes something around that I tend to have a knee-jerk reaction that feels like they’re attacking God himself. This is not usually accurate. So it’s good for me to calm down a bit.

For example, they mention a few times the Christian publishing industry and how they make money off selling books; they call almost all Christian fiction trash writing; they make it seem like going to conferences is a bit of a double-standard and pointless; they rag on holiday services.

So I find myself thinking- Everything can’t be free! If there are no Christian publishing companies how are books to be written and accessible? Isn’t there value in Christian books? And yes I’m tired of all the Amish Christian fiction books and a lot of the writing in Christian fiction is cheesy or preachy, but it’s not all like that! And isn’t it better that that is written for people who don’t want to read the secular stuff that’s full of f-words and sexual content? And isn’t there still value in conferences and what kind of person does that make me for wanting to go the TGC conference this year? And don’t we still need to acknowledge the reality we live in?

But then they wrap up each chapter by coming back around to pointing out the good or giving the ‘bottom line’ of the issue that is usually something that calms me down and recognize that they aren’t trying to demolish everything. They’re just pointing out some flaws and such that are worth pondering but making sure that with each topic our hearts are in the right place. That God is still the focus.

So I like this book and their podcast because it will keep me from becoming too set in my ways/thoughts or being too defensive when fair critiques are given. Nothing is perfect, and nothing will be this side of heaven. Just because something has a ‘Christian’ label or association, doesn’t mean it’s without fault but it also doesn’t mean it’s couched with ulterior motives and begging for deconstruction.


We need to try our best to stay balanced and not take the wrong stuff too seriously. A lot of what they poke at are the things that become 'performative.’ Because walking with the Lord and doing what’s right is not about performing. Especially in terms of Christian celebrity culture, mega churches, going to conferences, etc these can easily become a matter of performing to appear a certain way.

I think that is a good insight to always keep in mind- Am I performing or is this genuine?


If I’m Going to Be Judgy

One other point I found myself feeling judgy about was the 'entertainment’ aspect of their opinions.

Ted Kluck is an interesting combination of lit prof, football coach/jock, sensitive writer, movie critic. I’m still trying to figure him out.

A lot of times it felt like he got into these elitist/pretentious ‘rants’ and I didn’t really like it. Movie critics in general tend to annoy me because when I watch a movie I usually just want to be entertained. When I see the movies getting Oscars I roll my eyes and usually put them on my do-not-watch list. Which maybe seems at odds with the curious and thoughtful part of me, but listening to people compare movies and stuff is just not something I really care about, especially when the ‘meanings’ aren’t obvious.

Kluck included an entire appendix of movie Rushmores which seemed a bit of a ‘look how intelligent and analytical and funny I am’ flex.

I think the more I listened to their podcast the more I would understand his personality and I would probably be able to read all of it with a better perspective.

I think he would appreciate the book The Nineties by Chuck Klosterman because a lot of his references are from that time period and I’m a tad too young to get them.

Oh also a lot of the movies they mentioned were not ones I would watch/recommend for the content. They did say that they wish they had made different choices about this and I was encouraged that they weren’t dabbling in Game of Thrones. Of course I’m not the shining example of how to make good entertainment choices, but that doesn’t stop me from judging other people’s. I’m a sinner, too.


Additional point about Big T that stuck out to me. He mentions that he is ‘the person’ for several pastors where they can come and laugh and make fun of stuff without fear that they will be seen as terrible people or immature. I definitely get this. And I think my husband and I are those people for one of our pastor friends. We can make immature jokes or be politically incorrect or whatever and it’s a safe place. Pastors need that bit of normalcy and it’s not easy to find.


A Chat with KDM?

Kristin Kobes-Du Mez wrote the book Jesus and John Wayne. It’s a book that also critiques Christian subculture, Christian publishing companies, Christian celebrity, etc. But where her book differs than The Happy Rant is that there is no ‘happy’ and extra ‘rant.’ Also she didn’t make many statements assuring the reader that she still loves Jesus and the Bible.

I know the Happy Rant boys have at least heard of her book because Big T is a western fan and he made a few comments about John Wayne as if in response to KDM’s opinion that all Christians think Jesus and John Wayne are somehow the same thing or held in the same regard.

I think it would be a very interesting and entertaining podcast episode to hear them interview KDM…

At the very least KDM could get a few pointers on writing her next book in which she most assuredly will tear down a good portion of American Christians.


Recommendation

I would recommend this book. It’s funny. It’s easy and fast to read. It’s entertaining yet thought-provoking. It’s both immature and mature at the same time.

You’re not going to agree with everything they say or comment about. But that’s okay. This type of writing is meant that way.

The point of this book, in my mind, is both to make you laugh and also to reflect a little bit on ‘Christian’ things that you may not have really considered and may need to be more aware of.

Like Babylon Bee, you read it and think ‘Oh snap!… well actually they kinda have a point.’ Or ‘Hahaha… wait a minute… that’s me. Shoot.’

Pretty much all Christians will find their stuff relatable. If you aren’t emerged in Christian circles it won’t hit you the same way, but maybe it would be encouraging for you to read how there are people that don’t fit the mainstream stereotypes and disagree with a lot of the widespread ‘Christiany’ sentiments.


Shelf Reflection Book Review Blog
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest

[3.5 rounded down]

This is the final book in The Scholomance trilogy and also my least favorite.

I was excited about this series when I read the first book, A Deadly Education. But I felt disappointed by this last installment.

The first half was repetitive and annoying. Then we got more action and movement, a new conflict, but at times it was hard to follow and I’m not sure if I liked the ending. And I for sure didn’t like Galadriel.


Where Are We?

We leave book 2 (The Last Graduate) as the students are escaping the school. They’ve lured all the mals from around the world to the school and are going to send the school off into the void. But at the last minute Patience, the biggest maw-mouth ever, is right on El and Orion’s heels. They are the last ones to leave and Orion pushes El out the door. Cliff-hanger.

The Golden Enclaves begins with the reveal that Orion stayed behind at the school, inevitably devoured by the maw-mouth and now in eternal torment. El is beside herself in grief and anger. How could he have stayed behind?! They had done it! What was he thinking?!

Really the entire first third or half of the book is a constant reminder that Orion is “dead and screaming.” El is determined to figure out how to get back there and save him (by killing him and ending his misery). One long cycle of grief and anger and confusion.

And of course because she’s the brooding teen and tends to play the somewhat self-righteous victim, she’s a bit insufferable in this book with her- ‘I’m going to save him and no one can stop me or give me any logical or practical advice. I’m going to be reckless and moody but I’m a hero so you’ll love me for it’ vibe.

I liked her character in the first book. Her demeanor and attitude seemed to fit better when she was in the deadly school. But once she was out of the school I was hoping for a little more character change. Instead she got worse.


I liked when the conflict shifted from Orion-obsessed to El traveling to other enclaves to help them. Someone is attacking the enclaves one by one and they need El with her Golden Sutras to help re-establish their enclave foundations.

From London to New York to Dubai, El makes the rounds helping the very people she despises. She teams up with several different students from the Scholomance to help. The camaraderie they developed trying to destroy the school has carried over and acts as the buffer between the wizard elite and El’s rage. El is widely known as one of the most powerful wizards out there and is in high demand.

After all, she can kill a maw-mouth with a single phrase.

Oh and while she’s begrudgingly killing maw-mouths for the elite and pining for the chance to go kill Patience and end Orion’s torment (because he’s dead and screaming) she develops a weird lust for Liesel.

It seemed like Novik just wanted to add in another LGBTQ character so she threw in this odd temporary ‘relationship’ which isn’t really a relationship at all. They just have sex when they’re feeling big feelings (like stress and sadness and fear) and even though El loves Orion, it’s okay because “it made her feel good in her body.” And that’s all that sex is for.

Oh, AND, she had the opportunity to make it a threesome with Alfie too, but that’s a bit too long term for her and she doesn’t want to live in an enclave. Understandable.


Spoiler Alert

I feel like I have to mention a few things but they are definitely spoilers so keep scrolling to my Recommendation section if you don’t want to hear about it.

Spoiler

Okay, so first— Orion. You didn’t actually think he was dead did you?! Of course he can’t be dead. So how does he survive being devoured by a maw-mouth?

Well somehow he now ‘absorbs’ or ‘eats’ mals when he kills them. So Patience is INSIDE him along with all the other beings Patience ate—dead and screaming. Not a great life.

When El finds him at the school, he wants her to kill him and end what he’s feeling. But she’s determined to fix it, so no, Orion. You can’t sacrifice yourself AGAIN. El is going to be a hero once more.

Wait, how is he a maw-mouth? I’m glad you asked. His evil maleficer mother fed his embryo to a maw-mouth (or the other way around?). He is like a half-breed of human and maw-mouth. That’s how he was able to kill mals so easily. His evil mother CREATED him for her own ends.

But don’t worry. Not only can El kill a maw-mouth with a single phrase (‘You’re already dead.’) She can apparently do it rather specifically. She kills the maw-mouth INSIDE Orion without killing him. I mean cool, Orion gets to live, but I’m not sure I understand how this was possible…

Second, who is attacking the enclaves? It’s Galadriel! Gasp! Every time El kills a maw-mouth an enclave foundation cracks and, depending on the strength of the enclave as a whole, falls into the void. To her horror, she doesn’t find this out until a lot of death and destruction has already happened.

Why does this work this way? Because the bad enclaves (non-Golden enclaves) are built on malia which is generated by the sacrifice of a strict-mana wizard who they basically bury alive and crush with enchanted rocks over a long period of time until the wizard becomes a maw-mouth and goes off into the world eating other wizards (mostly non-enclave wizards) and sending the malia back to the enclave. Pretty dark huh.

So let’s fast forward to the very end.

Now that El knows the truth her desire is for all of the rest of the world’s enclaves to stop building their homes on murder. Noble. She will help any enclave become a golden enclave if they put up the very large amount mana for it.

I suppose this is where the true nature of humanity becomes exposed because eliminating maw-mouths for good will only work if wizards completely stop using malia on any level. But they’re used to the convenience and luxuries it brings so it’s impossible to get to this point. There will always be selfish people who cheat.

Turns out they still need the Scholomance but it undergoes a renovation and will no longer be the deadly school it was before. Now, Orion will stay at the school as the protector he always has been and will kill any mals that try to come after the students, which I guess he can do now without eating or absorbing them? Again, I don’t understand how this works.

And what about El’s mom? We don’t really know.

Recommendation

I liked the twist that El killing maw-mouths had a direct and significant consequence that they had to deal with. That was a good plot point. I’m fine with the book having somewhat of an open-end because that’s the real world, all of humanity can’t really get to a kumbayah state.

I also liked the global travel and getting to see what the enclaves looked like in their cultural context. It’s pretty complex and I think it would make cool visuals in a movie. I think they could combine all three books into a pretty good movie, maybe two. Definitely not three.

But the unlikability of Galadriel’s character, some of the confusion on how the magic works, the random sexual encounters between El and Liesel, and the insufferable first third of the book made this book feel like a rather disappointing series ender.

If I had known what this third book would be like, I’m not sure I would have started the series. That feels like too strong of a statement. I did like the other Novik book I read (Spinning Silver) and I think her world building and use of magic is creative and interesting. I’ll definitely pick up more of her books.

She’s a good writer and I’m sure there will be a lot of people who really enjoy all three books, but it just didn’t quite hit the mark for what I was wanting for the third book.

In conclusion, I won’t tell you to not read this book. I won’t tell you to not read the series (though if you’re reading this review, you’ve probably already started). But I will just suggest you curb your expectations for the finale and then you either will not be disappointed or it will far exceed what you were expecting.


[Content Advisory: lots of f-words, a couple sexual scenes between Galadriel and Liesel that are short and not super descriptive]

Shelf Reflection Book Review Blog
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest

A very conflicted 3.5 stars. The premise of this book caught my attention and, paired with Tim Keller’s name, I was sure this would be a perfect fit. We all interact with people with different beliefs than ourselves and it’s clear that most people aren’t doing an awesome job of it-- thank you social media. I am the first to raise my hand that I needed a book with this title. I am still processing what I read, but overall I was pretty disappointed with the execution of this topic.

This book is a compilation of essays written by 10 different people based on their own experience in our conflicted culture. There were a lot of true and good things advised- like interacting with humility, tolerance, and patience- but it all felt so vague and abstract. Maybe the specifics of what I’m looking for is unrealistic to expect to fit into a book and would make for better in-person discussion. I guess I still need to wrestle with that.

I just didn’t feel like they really gave me any concrete examples to follow. Yet they all came across as if they had an idea in their mind of what they wanted everyone to do or say, but no one was willing to just say it bluntly. They were all beating around the bush of really portraying: this is right and this is wrong. Act like this, not like this. Say this, not that. Because honestly, I think we all already know we’re supposed to be humble, patient, and tolerant, but I think we’re all walking around with our own definitions and ideas about what each of those look like. We all think we’re doing them but we’re probably not.

I also feel like there was this negative generalization of white evangelicals by most of the contributors (and really people everywhere) that I’m exasperated of. It’s this idea that all white evangelicals, because of their privilege, somehow have an incomplete or illegitimate faith, living in some la-la land, unable to see or understand hard reality and that, though it’s not necessarily our fault, we are these immature and unenlightened Christians whose opinions and faiths don’t really matter because we haven’t personally seen, experienced, or struggled with racism or oppression of some kind. We are a group ‘to be reached with the truth.’ How am I to respond when I happen to be white and I’ve chosen the beliefs of evangelical Christianity? How does that automatically make ‘my gospel’ ‘white and wrong’ when we’re reading the same Bible?

Additionally, there’s this vibe that if we’re not out advocating for social justice every day then we are part of the problem, not the solution. And I realize these are extreme and exaggerated statements to make, but I read and hear it time and time again with no clear ‘solution.’ Books like this aren’t giving any other sort of practical and realistic suggestions of how this actually would look like for a normal US citizen. And I’m just at a loss.

You can’t just say the church and white evangelicals are getting it wrong and then provide vague directives like ‘be humble, patient, and tolerant,’ ‘listen more than speak,’ ‘choose our words carefully,’ ‘be willing to take action,’ ‘have a posture of embrace rather than fear,’ and ‘don’t overidentify with a political group.’ These are not new concepts. We all think we’re doing these. Give us examples of what this does or doesn’t look like for the average person. How do conversations actually look? What particular action steps make sense for my life as a stay-at-home mom in a mostly white suburb with not a lot of people I interact with on a regular basis?

All of these contributors have significant areas of influence- professors, pastors, book-writers, song-writers, doctors, etc. It’s great what they are doing and the influence they are able to have to bring about change, but we don’t all have the ability, capacity, or opportunity to have our lives look like that. I just want a book on this topic that is more accessible and answers questions rather than avoids them.

It’s probably clear by now that I was disappointed, and I didn’t agree with everything that was written, BUT I don’t condemn this book by any means. I think it’s probably worth everyone reading because we’re all coming at it with different experiences, expectations, and questions. What I found to be abstract and unhelpful may make a lot of sense to you. Like I said, I’m still processing and trying to figure out what I’m going to take away from this book. Try it for yourself and see if you can find the answers you’re looking for.

**Received an ARC via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review**

See more reviews at www.shelfreflection.com !