REVIEW: THE CONSOLATIONS OF PHILOSOPHY

The Consolations of PhilosophyThe Consolations of Philosophy by Alain de Botton
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This was the first link of the chain of thoughts and instants that led me to reading this book by philosopher Alain de Botton.

This is one of those rare applied philosophy books that pose the question peculiarly left untouched by many contemporary professionals in the field of how one can use philosophy and philosophical ideas, some of them quite old, to make their life better and happier. To me, and by all appearances to Mr. de Botton as well, simplicity is a virtue of itself, and there is very little value to be found in ideas that need several tomes of derivative works and commentary to be decoded.

Consolations of Philosophy book has none of that. You could call it anti-philosophy, in an almost ying-yang sense. Mr. de Botton took six problems commonly faced by some—I’m tempted to say all— people and asked “what would Socrates, Seneca, Montaigne, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche do?”

It worked. It gave me a sense that these famous thinkers basically had the same insecurities I do, and it did so amazingly eloquently, informatively and most of all intelligibly. His train of thought was clear and I felt invited to hop on for the ride from the get-go.

The sad part is that most of the original works actually are the boring, long-winded books we have come to connect philosophy with. I suppose that makes Mr. de Botton a real bearer of ideas, a cultural translator or interpreter. Whatever he is, his job is extremely valuable and that was awesome.

Excerpts and some comments:

Consolation for Unpopularity, Socrates:

“It would be as naïve to hold that unpopularity is synonymous with truth as to believe that it is synonymous with error. The validity of an idea of action is determined not by whether it is widely believed or widely reviled but by whether it obeys the rules of logic.”

…for the next time I have to confront insulting sworn carnivores, skeptics, dogmatists—anyone with a closed mind, really. Or for expressing an opinion that is over-looked in group situations.

Consolation for Not Having Enough Money, Epicurus:

“At the heart of Epicureanism is the thought that we are as bad as intuitively answering “What will make me happy?” as “What will make me healthy?” The answer which most rapidly comes to mind is liable to be as faulty. [i.e.—it’s not money!]

… for the next time I stress over not getting a review done, playing a game, or having little income.

Consolation for Frustration, Seneca:

if most philosophers feel no need to write like this [clearly], it is because they trust that, so long as argument is logical, the style in which it is presented to the reader will not determine its effectiveness. Seneca believed in a different picture of the mind. Arguments are like eels: however logical, they may slip from the mind’s weak grasp unless fixed there by imagery and style. We need metaphors to derive a sense of what cannot be seen or touched, or else we will forget.

… for the next time I worry about not being precise and finding it difficult to speak succinctly. Speak intelligibly if you want to be memorable!

Consolation for inadequacy, Montaigne:

But writing with simplicity requires courage, for there is a danger that one will be overlooked, dismissed as simpleminded by those with a tenacious belief that impassable prose is a hallmark of intelligence. So strong is this bias, Montaigne wondered whether the majority of university scholar would have appreciated Socrates, a man they professed to revere about all others, if he had approached them in their own towns, devoid of the prestige of Plato’s dialogues, in his dirty cloak, speaking in plain language. […] It is striking how much more seriously we are likely to be taken after we have been dead a few centuries. Statements which might be acceptable when they issue from the quills of ancient authors are likely to attract ridicule when expressed by contemporaries.

…for when I feel stupid, doubt my own arguments and thoughts, because they do not come complete with fancy words (thanks Dad!)

Consolation for a Broken Heart, Schopenhauer:

We should in time learn to forgive our rejectors. The break-up was not their choice. In every clumsy attempt by one person to inform another that they need more space or time, that they are reluctant to commit or are afraid of intimacy, the rejector is striving to intellectualize an essentially unconscious negative verdict formulated by the will-to-life. Their reason may have had an appreciation of our qualities, their will-to-life did not and told them so in a way that brooked no argument—by draining them of sexual interest in us. If they were seduced away by people less intelligent than we are, we should not condemn them for shallowness. We should remember, as Schopenhauer explains, that: What is looked for in marriage is not intellectual entertainment, but the procreation of children.

…for the next time I am, uh, rejected by a woman for not inspiring her to have children with me?

Consolation for Difficulties, Nietzsche:

In the eyes of people who are seeing us for the first time… usually we are nothing more than a single individual trait which leaps to the eye and determines the whole impression we make. Thus the gentlest and most reasonable of men can, if he wears a large moustache… usually be seen as no more than the appurtenance of a large moustache, that is to say a military type, easily angered and occasionally violent — and as such he will be treated. […] The secret for harvesting from existence the greatest fruitfulness and the greatest enjoyment is—to live dangerously! Build your cities on the slopes of Vesuvius!”

…for the next time I make base judgments about others. Remember that everybody’s the centre of their own universe, the protagonists of their own movie, and ultimately the only actors on their destiny that really matter. Be subjective about others (allow them to be subjective about themselves) and objective about yourself, that is allow seeing yourself as others see you, the good and the bad, and be mindful of it. Keep in mind that most people will like you or dislike you no matter what, so go with it. Move and function from love, not fear.

See? Just writing this review inspired me to put down some of my own values and philosophical musings. Can there be any greater compliment for this book and Alain de Botton?

View all my reviews

REVIEW: CONVERSATIONS WITH GOD

Conversations With God: An Uncommon Dialogue, Vol. 1Conversations With God: An Uncommon Dialogue, Vol. 1 by Neale Donald Walsch
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I don’t remember where I first heard about this book. I think it was High Existence and one of their many articles/lists on the books that will “violently shift your perspective” or some such. What sealed it for me was when I listened to a podcast (Positive Head Episode #12) where the site’s founder, Jordan Lejuwaan, was invited. When he was asked to name a book he’d take with him on a deserted island, he replied with little hesitation: “Conversations with God.” The best part? The host agreed with him!

Now, these are people who are very much against religion as we understand it and the way we talk about it in public discourse. When I first heard of this book, I recall that I, too, was very skeptical, just judging by the title: “who is this guy with this frankly messianic, banal idea of speaking to God and transcribing the conversation?” It seemed silly, like something belonging to the Middle Ages, certainly not our supposedly progressive-thinking world. Mind you, I’m trying to offer you what had been my automatic thoughts, which I might not actually agree with on a more conscious, rational level.

Having read a badly converted .mobi version of the .pdf I managed to find online on my Kindle—just another hi-tech mode of delivery—, I can now confidently say the following:

If somebody told me: “man, this book contains the words of God”, if I could somehow be certain that they were speaking the truth, and if I did put my prejudices aside, my prejudices that come from growing up in a society built on soul-crushing organised religions that are deadly serious and strict about what God is supposed to be, the contents of this book are close to what I would ideally expect to find. In that way it leaves nothing to be desired. It has a certain something that truly feels divine, superhuman, an oriental or pagan worldview that does not deny people (of all sexes!) our body and all the fun things we can do with it. Here we have God joking around, pronouncing hedonism and all kinds of sex as holy, right next to unconditional love and our calling to be Who We Really Are, which as I understand it means that we become God by creating with our lives the best, most fulfilling, creative and loving version of ourselves.

This book wasn’t pretentious, nor dogmatic, nor close-minded. It was nothing of what you’d come to expect from what we call religion. It does have a lot of common points with Jesus Christ’s teachings as they have reached us today (which are pretty much the same across the board and across historical and famous spiritual teachers), but the book is certainly not Christian, which is a good part of the reason why you needn’t look farther than other reviews of this book on Goodreads to see Christian followers denouncing the book left and right, flat-out refusing to read it because it will supposedly challenge their faith. People, if you want to be devout and pious, at least try to do it right.

I don’t know who or what it was who spoke to Mr. Walsch. I have no idea if it was God, whatever God is or might be. It could be the writer just talking to himself, but why would that make it impossible it to have been God speaking through him? It all depends on how we define God. I’m a realisation of God writing this review right now, you are a realisation of God by reading it, and you are a realisation of God no matter what your response to it is.

I’ve recommended this book to many people already, and I recommend it to you too. It really doesn’t matter what your creed is or what you might be proud of calling a lack of one; contrary to my strong thoughts on what ancient organised religions believe we should be doing with our lives, I cannot see a reason why following this book’s advice would make your life anything but better. Even if you’re an atheist who believes in scientism, I do think that reading this book would do you good. In fact, I’d say that rejecting it without thought would just prove a certain amount of closed-mindedness in you and make you dangerously similar to those aforementioned hardcore “Christians” who feel proud of themselves for refusing to read a book. Doesn’t that make you uncomfortable?

While we’re at it, let me share with you a closing thought that came to me yesterday. We accept that organised religion is a powerful entity—much less so now than in the past, but let’s say that they still have no problem of capturing the imagination of billions. Now, organised science, what we’d call the mainstream scientific dogma—just follow the money—they have power not only over the minds of billions, but also actual power, mainly expressed through the activities of huge techno-corporations that have been setting the rules and the paradigm. Both organised religion and organised science are supposed to be superhuman, and therefore have a duty to be neutral and above the petty realm of “human weakness”.

We know that organised religion is full of scumbag priests and other subcategories of clergy. So what is it exactly that protects organised science from similar “infiltration”? Both fields promise mountains of money and prestige. How can one safely rest his or her faith with one over the other as the ultimate representative of an accurate and objective world theory? It seems to me that what it takes to be religous is faith and an ability to reject the proof that lies in the material world, it takes an equal but opposite(?) amount of faith and ability to reject the proof that lies in the material world to be an atheist.

Heh, look at me, never missing a chance to attack scientism!

I’ll say it again: if reading, enjoying and feeling inclined to follow or at least consider the life advice contained within Conversation with God makes me “religious”, there, done: I’m religious. If you are unable to tell the difference between the frankly liberating information contained in this book and what has passed off as religion for far too long in the world at large, then that is something you’ll have to sort out by yourself, I’m afraid.

View all my reviews

REVIEW: MAN’S SEARCH FOR MEANING

Man's Search for MeaningMan’s Search for Meaning by Viktor E. Frankl

My rating: 2 of 5 stars

Read this on my Kindle.

The first part is about this psychiatrist’s time in a number of concentration camps. That was the fascinating, horrifying part of the book and I truly enjoyed it. It put everything else I was doing while reading the book into perspective.

The second part I found confusing and not much from it has stuck with me. Logos, apart from meaning or the ability to think and reason also means speech in Greek and logotherapía means speech therapy, the kind you would get if you couldn’t pronounce r, g or s (and sometimes what I think I need when I realise just how badly and hastily I pronounce some words). I kept subconsciously thinking there was some kind of connection between Frankl’s logotherapy and logotherapía, which isn’t the case at all.

In the end I didn’t come out having understood what this book was about. If you ask me what Dr. Frankl’s logotherapy is, I wouldn’t be able to accurately tell you. However, I don’t think that it’s the book’s fault; on the contrary, it was well structured and argued. Perhaps I just wasn’t so interested. The first part though… that was intense.

View all my reviews

REVIEW: NOT THE FUTURE WE ORDERED: PEAK OIL, PSYCHOLOGY, AND THE MYTH OF ETERNAL PROGRESS

Not the Future We Ordered: Peak Oil, Psychology, and the Myth of Eternal ProgressNot the Future We Ordered: Peak Oil, Psychology, and the Myth of Eternal Progress by John Michael Greer
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Quick read, rich in information, read on Kindle. John Michael Greer is my recent obsession I discovered through Ran Prieur and the links he posts on his blog.

Having been a regular reader of JMG’s blog The Archdruid Report for a few months now, the content and topic of Not the Future We Ordered didn’t come as a surprise. In short, it’s about how progress is our contemporary “civic religion” and myth; what the psychological impact of living through peak oil and its aftermath will look like in the wider population (surprising and fascinating to read) and what people should be doing to build some foundation for the future and for young people to improve their chances of survival in the future, the current situation being what it is. Made my current desire to go find some land somewhere, cultivate it and develop my hardly existent practical skills even stronger.

Overall, if the topic interests you–it absolutely should–but you’re kind of put off by the fact that JMG is, well, an archdruid, take my advice and allow yourself to be surprised by how eloquent, backed up, bulletproof and to the point his argumentation is. I’m giving this book just three stars out of five because a lot of the information I felt I had already come across in the blog (albeit in the book it was more structured) and because it was short! What can I say? I love me some JMG.

View all my reviews

REVIEW: YUKIKO’S SPINACH

Yukiko's SpinachYukiko’s Spinach by Frédéric Boilet

My rating: 2 of 5 stars

 

This is a manga recommended by Daphne a million and a half years ago. I read it in one single-hour sitting on my Kindle, surrounded by unknown Bulgarians in a hotel in Sandanski. They were sleeping in different beds.

I’ll be brief and to-the-point: this was self-reference taken to the extreme. I like it when artists play around with these things, when they break the fourth wall, for example, or whatever the equivalent for texts might be – I’m not feeling creative enough to come up with something better than the incredibly lame “burning the press” – but Monsieur Boilet went over the top. You did, Frédéric. I admit: it was interesting in a way, but in the end I couldn’t help but get the feeling that, were the veneer of pretentious self-reference, such as the sketches, supposedly the inspiration of this comic book, to be removed, there would be nothing left.

No. There would be something left: the small details that made me want to visit Japan (yawn, right?); the cute observations the artist made of Yukiko and masterfully put onto paper, most memorably the mole on her face that reminded him of the geography of some islands in the Pacific the name of which escapes me right now, and its art style, which had me wondering all along: “How did the guy actually make this? It’s unlike anything I’ve ever seen.” The answer came at the end as part of the story itself. Or did it?

And to think I usually like this kind of stories… Alas: while reading it, I made the shuddering realisation that, if I chose to write a story or make a comic about something that took place in my own life, a few years ago or maybe even today I might have chosen this oh-so-mysterious-I-wonder-what-really-happened! style of self-reference. *looks around uncomfortably*

But seriously: this looked amazing on the Kindle (see above). Even though I didn’t enjoy the story so much, I would still recommend checking it out if you have one.

View all my reviews

REVIEW: JOURNEY OF SOULS

Journey of Souls: Case Studies of Life Between LivesJourney of Souls: Case Studies of Life Between Lives by Michael Newton

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

 


I believe in reincarnation. There are just too many things going on out there that are inexplicable if you rule out survival of consciousness. And if this book is legitimate, which from the look of it it is, Journey of Souls only adds to the mystery.

A quick word on whether this book is substantial proof for the existence of reincarnation: if you don’t believe in this kind of thing, this book won’t rid you of your skepticism. It’s like the forever-discussed “proof” of the existence of God or not. Atheists would never accept or even recognize “proof” for the existence of God. If you are one yourself, sit down and think what kind of proof would be enough to convince you that God exists, and what other atheists would have to say on the matter. To be fair, respective theists would never accept the proposition that such a thing as proof is in fact necessary, either. Not when faith is the cornerstone of religions in general.

Back to the book. If you’ve ever heard of past life regression through hypnosis, Michael Newton is the guy who apparently first used and popularised the technique.

Nature or nurture? Just your soul feeling adventurous, silly!

To tell you the truth, I imagined it to be better when I downloaded it for my Kindle. In the first paragraph of this review, I mentioned that the book only adds to the mystery. Big time it does: I came out of it more puzzled than enlightened. I disliked some of the questions he asked his hypnotised clients, and the whole after-/before-life system assembled by the info gathered from the tens (hundreds?) of cases used for the book seemed to me too anthropocentric, too much of the existing material world. Apparently there are levels of soul maturity, as well as soul “schools” and soul nurseries or, for lack of a better term, tribes.

Then again, if Journey of Souls reflects what’s actually happening at all, that would mean that it is actually the the human condition that reflects the way things are in the spirit world, not the other way around. It seems plausible; people are souls in meat suits. You don’t stop being a person when you drive a car, do you? Or maybe you become an “enhanced” person given a tool that expands your possibilities. I can see a similar reason for souls wanting to incarnate and indeed, such reasoning is given in the book.




At the end of the day, you can only know for sure if you’ve had a past life regression yourself. Maybe that’s the only way for any of us to be convinced that death is not the end, and maybe only then can we obtain the knowledge we can actually do something with in order to change our lives for the better. Anything else is so many steps removed it’s like reading sex stories expecting to feel what an orgasm feels like second-hand. Errr, I mean… What was I saying before ? Yes; at the very least, if Mr. Newton’s goal was to make me want to be hypnotised to find out my spiritual past, he got that part right.

So what do you say? Is the truth out there or in here?

View all my reviews

REVIEW: PIHKAL: A CHEMICAL LOVE STORY

Pihkal: A Chemical Love StoryPihkal: A Chemical Love Story by Alexander Shulgin

My rating: 5 of 5 stars



pihkal_kindle

Sometimes you read some books you think everybody should read, if only just so that they can correct their misconceptions on certain things.

Alexander Shulgin was a researcher of psychotropics which he had been inventing in his laboratories and testing on himself for almost half a century. Actually, no; merely calling him that would be like describing J.S. Bach simply as a Baroque musician. If it wasn’t for him, a great many psychoactive compounds, including MDMA, the tremendous potential for psychotherapeutic use of which it was also he who discovered, would have never seen the light of day; people wouldn’t have enjoyed them and found insight in their use… The field as a whole would be much poorer.

In fact, given the prolonged forbidding legal status of the production, distribution and even use for the majority of known psychedelics since the ’60s, without Shulgin there would have hence been next to no research at all in this field of human knowledge and experience we are repeatedly and stubbornly denying ourselves from. He was one of the most important beacons of reason, curiosity and tenderness on this topic, and that is why I wanted to get my hands on PiKHaL: anything written by Sasha is required reading on this subject.


Since it’s a big book and it’s expensive and difficult to get it even used, I tracked it down on .pdf soon after I got my Kindle, which makes it easier to enjoy hard-to-find works like this on digital format. The day after I started reading it, there was news that Shulgin had passed away – at the age of 88 and after inventing and trying hundreds of successful and not-so-successful “drugs”, no less.

Shulgin in this book told his life’s story and how he got interested in the things that made him famous (it has to do with the placebo effect and the power of the mind); how he met his wife, who co-authored this work with him; he described his little psychedelic sessions with friends in a very affectionate and effective way.

In their remote but blessed corner of the universe they tread new ground and wrote all about it. It was epic.

Read this and come back to me mumbling something about wanting to keep it natural and chemicals-free. I dare you.


I’m perfectly aware that I might be getting on your nerves with these Kindle shots. The first two should be easy enough to read if you want to get a feel of what it was like reading these highlight-worthy quotes. But in this last bit the font is too small, and I admit it’s probably way too much effort reading text from those .jpgs. They serve as aesthetic enhancements of the review. Or I could just call them my reviews’ seasonings, like they have in restaurants on every table: complete with salt, pepper, oil, chili perhaps, here in Bulgaria garlic sauce… Optional, but there for you if you’re feeling like it.

I’ll sign off this review with a transcript of the picture above, because I know that sometimes food is best eaten pure.

PIHKAL: A Chemical Love Story (Shulgin)
– Your Highlight on page 208 | location 3183-3185 | Added on Wednesday, 11 June 2014 14:20:42

I looked up at him and smiled, showing all my teeth, “I learned long ago that the most dangerous opponent is the one who tells you he hasn’t been near the game in years. He’s the one who’ll wipe the board with you, while apologizing for being so terribly rusty.”
==========
PIHKAL: A Chemical Love Story (Shulgin)
– Your Highlight on page 215 | location 3294-3297 | Added on Wednesday, 11 June 2014 14:34:12

“You told me that you invent new psychedelics and that you have a group of people who try them out after you’ve made sure they’re safe and ,/ He interrupted, “Not safe. There is no such thing as safety. Not with drugs and not with anything else. You can only presume relative safety. Too much of anything is unsafe. Too much food, too much drink, too much aspirin, too much anything you can name, is likely to be unsafe.”
==========
PIHKAL: A Chemical Love Story (Shulgin)
– Your Highlight on page 219 | location 3349-3351 | Added on Wednesday, 11 June 2014 14:39:51

“Of course, there are many ways to alter your consciousness and your perceptions; there always have been, and new ways will keep being developed. Drugs are only one way, but I feel they’re the way that brings about the changes most rapidly, and – in some ways – most dependably. Which makes them very valuable when the person using them knows what he’s doing.”

And… sorry, I just couldn’t hold myself. Quotes really do a better job at reviewing themselves than I ever could.

PIHKAL: A Chemical Love Story (Shulgin)
– Your Highlight on page 176 | location 2690-2698 | Added on Sunday, 8 June 2014 04:37:06

Sam said, “I don’t know if you realize this, but there are some researchers – doctors – who are giving this kind of drug to volunteers, to see what the effects are, and they’re doing it the proper scientific way, in clean white hospital rooms, away from trees and flowers and the wind, and they’re surprised at how many of the experiments turn sour. They’ve never taken any sort of psychedelic themselves, needless to say. Their volunteers – they’re called ‘subjects,’ of course – are given mescaline or LSD and they’re all opened up to their surroundings, very sensitive to color and light and other people’s emotions, and what are they given to react to? Metal bed-frames and plaster walls, and an occasional white coat carrying a clipboard. Sterility. Most of them say afterwards that they’ll never do it again.” “Jesus! Right now, after what I’ve just gone through, that sounds worse than awful.” “Not all of the research is being done that way, thank God, but too much of it is.” “What a shame,” I said, saddened by the picture, “What a shame!”

View all my reviews

REVIEW: THE BOOK OF THE DAMNED

The Book of the DamnedThe Book of the Damned by Charles Fort

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

 


(It’s already been almost three months since I finished this one… just for you to get an idea of how slowly things are making the passover from my life to the ‘mension these days.)

Reading the Book of the Damned on the book-damning device.

Below you will find an assortment of highlights from The Book of the Damned pulled from the clipping file of my Kindle. Convenient, that. You can find the same super-version of the book as the one I read for free on Amazon. I’m still not sure if it’s a best-of, Charles Fort’s collected works, or what… There seems to be at least some content which doesn’t match up with the text found on his four books as found separately.

Anyway, back to the quotes:

The data of the damned. I have gone into the outer darkness of scientific and philosophical transactions and proceedings, ultra-respectable, but covered with the dust of disregard. I have descended into journalism. I have come back with the quasi-souls of lost data. They will march.

The power that has said to all these things that they are damned, is Dogmatic Science.

All sciences begin with attempts to define. Nothing ever has been defined. Because there is nothing to define. Darwin wrote The Origin of Species. He was never able to tell what he meant by a “species.” It is not possible to define. Nothing has ever been finally found out. Because there is nothing final to find out. It’s like looking for a needle that no one ever lost in a haystack that never was—

The novel is a challenge to vulgarization: write something that looks new to you: someone will point out that the thrice-accursed Greeks said it long ago.

It may be that in the whole nineteenth century no event more important than this occurred. In La Nature, 1887, and in L’Année Scientifique, 1887, this occurrence is noted. It is mentioned in one of the summer numbers of Nature, 1887. Fassig lists a paper upon it in the Annuaire de Soc. Met., 1887. Not a word of discussion. Not a subsequent mention can I find. Our own expression: What matters it how we, the French Academy, or the Salvation Army may explain? A disk of worked stone fell from the sky, at Tarbes, France, June 20, 1887.

My notion of astronomic accuracy: Who could not be a prize marksman, if only his hits be recorded?

But what would a deep-sea fish learn even if a steel plate of a wrecked vessel above him should drop and bump him on the nose? Our submergence in a sea of conventionality of almost impenetrable density. Sometimes I’m a savage who has found something on the beach of his island. Sometimes I’m a deep-sea fish with a sore nose.

Charles Fort was a trailblazer. What we call today paranormal or occult, together with all the relevant scientific investigations, in a few words what we’d expect from Mulder and Scully, to a large extent we owe to him. Here’s a guy who lived in the ’20s and researched old copies of Scientific American, Nature and other such periodicals and magazines, looking for the damned, the unexplainable, the excluded. For what good is science, if it only chooses to include to its dogma what it can explain, sweeping under the carpet all that can be used to challenge its grand theories?

Giant, village-sized wheels submerged in the middle of the ocean; periodic rains of fish, frogs in various states of decay and of a gelatinous mass of unknown origin; falling stone discs, as in the quote above; meteors; lights in the sky moving in formation (reported in the 19th century); footprints of impossible creatures; giant hailstones; cannonballs entombed in solid rock, and that’s just a sample.

Reading about these mysterious exclusions was a delight. I love everything that challenges my way of seeing the world and allows me to contemplate alternative explanations for life, the universe and everything. To be fair, some of Fort’s favourite theories were down-right bizarre, such as his insistence on imagining a realm above our own from which all the falling creatures and materials originated – what our own surface world would be, conceptually, for the “deep-sea fish with the sore nose”, as in the last extract I quoted above. The existence of such a place sounds no less ridiculous now than it did in the 1920s, but I think Fort’s point was that his arbitrary explanations were just as good as the official ones offered by the scientific dogma of the time, which our present, widely-accepted, matter-of-fact world theories of today mirror. To be sure, a part – I don’t know how significant – of the excluded, would be possible to include today, but I’m sure that many of the phenomena Fort goes through in his Book of the Damned would be just as inexplicable today as they were in the centuries past.

There are two reasons this book isn’t getting five stars from me. The first one is that it’s twice as long as I think it should have been. I felt that Fort at certain points was simply repeating himself. It’s also possible he was just saying the same thing in a different, more difficult to understand way, and this is precisely the second reason this isn’t getting five stars. Fort’s language and style was very hit or miss. To give you an idea, the quotes I’ve included in this review are some of the easiest parts to understand from the whole book. Others love it. Myself, I can’t say I hate it, but I’m not sure it’s as successful a writing technique as Fort must have hoped for it to be.

The same hit-or-miss-ness is applicable to the book as a whole. I thought it was tremendously interesting and a significant publication that should be studied further and give inspiration to present-day Charles Forts, but I don’t believe the style is for everyone. Why don’t you find out for yourself if it’s right for you, though? It’s free!

View all my reviews

Review: Naoki Urasawa presenta: 20th Century Boys, Libro 1: Amigo

Naoki Urasawa presenta: 20th Century Boys, Libro 1: Amigo (20th Century Boys, #1)Naoki Urasawa presenta: 20th Century Boys, Libro 1: Amigo by Naoki Urasawa

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Manga + Kindle + aprender idiomas = ¡Win! (¡Victoria!)

Estoy enamorado de verdad de la idea de leer manga en mi Kindle, ¡y gratis también! El primer que he probado es 20th Century Boys de Naoki Urasawa, creador de Monster, que me avergüenza decir que nunca lo acabé. Algún día, quizás, quizás… Por lo que conseguí entender, porque una de las razones que lo leo el manga en español es para aprender palabras nuevas y practicar y por eso es claro que no entiendo todo, esta obra se ve muy prometedora. Solo espero que esta vez la leeré hasta el final. No tengo nada de paciencia con series muy largas…

A propósito, no sé qué es la mejora manera de escribir críticas para mangas. No voy criticar todos los libros, ¡eso significaria 22+ criticas por solo un manga! No, debe que haber otra manera… A ver.

View all my reviews

Review: Off-Topic: The Story of an Internet Revolt

Off-Topic: The Story of an Internet RevoltOff-Topic: The Story of an Internet Revolt by G.R. Reader

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This book was the first one I finished on my new Kindle, a fact which, in combination with its contents, makes me feel kind of tainted, like knowingly eating dolphin meat or something; posting a sincere review of it here after reading about Goodreads and what happened a few months ago feels in turn like I’m writing about my experience of eating dolphin meat while giving it a star rating. But I’ll go through with this, because it’s not dolphin meat.

I knew that Amazon acquired Goodreads last year from the moment it happened. From the first second I knew what it would mean for Goodreads as a website, as a social network, as a resource. But I didn’t budge. I’ve seen this happen so many times before: great websites or ideas turn “evil”, my beloved CouchSurfing being the most prominent example I can think of right now; I went on, for what could I have honestly done as a single person to stop things, change things, make the guys at the head of CouchSurfing or Goodreads realise that what they had done meant turning on their community, the people they owed all their success to? Should I have changed my profile and alerted people of the fact? Shold I have jumped ship?

I’m still very far from being sure about what the best course of action should be, the perfect balance between convenienve and idealism, both in my offline and online lives. I have wanted to join BeWelcome, the best alternative to CouchSurfing, for example, but I feel as if I have invested too much time to the latter to make a change like that. At the same time, CouchSurfing has become so bad that it has naturally lost me as a user, something Goodreads hasn’t achieved -yet-, but then I’m not a social user of the site and I’ve never felt part of any community in it, unlike most of the people who contributed to this book and were alerted to and alarmed by the changes mostly because of that involvement.

I wasn’t even aware of the censorship before I stumbled upon an abandoned “beacon” profile which had most of its details replaced with anti-Goodreads messages and promotion of Off-Topic. You could say that it was an efficient strategy, because the message eventually reached me, the oblivious user – or I should say, I reached the message.

Having now read the book, I realise I’m supposed to do something with this information, right? But is there anything I can do which would mean anything? Should I make my small revolt against Goodreads, when it was on myKindle where I read this book – complete with Amazon-powered Goodreads integration that doesn’t work as I had imagined it would? Should I move my reviews to BookLikes, like some people did? Why use a social network at all, if I’m ready to give up the convenience of the site for some vague ideology? And at the very end, if to enjoy a free service online, you become the commodity, can there be any escape at all from the sudden-death ToU?

I have sadly become cynical over the years, especially about online activism. I see a lot of people being very sensitive and idealistic on the web but with a seemingly loose grasp of reality. They think that because CS or GR seem friendly and tailored to their own needs – social networks are made to give this impression, after all – that they, alone, can make a difference, just by spreading the message. Often, but not always of course – because there are some people whose character is such that they react very strongly to things like that from all sides – cyber-activists can double as happy, obedient citizens/consumers with a straight face, which boggles my mind. When people get so worked up about these changes that they actively quit sites, I don’t know what to think. On the one hand, their determination and bullheadedness is admirable – it really is. On the other hand, I don’t see what kind of alternative they’re imagining and, most important of all, how they can make sure that their alternative can remain as pure, idealistic and humble as they imagine their perfect social network to be. How they can make sure that the new place will stay better than Goodreads before the natural moral entropy of the web forces them to find their new digital Zion.

But I’m grumpy today. A storm in a teacup can bring about good things and I’m grateful that there are people out there who don’t overanalyze themselves out of any sort of action, meaningful or not.

View all my reviews