Reviews

Sapiens: кратка история на човечеството by Ина Димитрова, Yuval Noah Harari, Ювал Ноа Харари

Only show reviews with written explanations

vacantbones's review against another edition

2.0

In a nutshell, Sapiens is fine. I studied anthropology, so quite a bit of the content felt like meeting up with an old friend after some time apart rather than meeting someone new.

Wasn't a fan of the author's nearly condescending tone in the read, and felt that some of the presented arguments didn't carry enough weight - fact and opinion feel conflated at times. Harari doesn't seem to be a very big fan of, well, sapiens at all in the end.

shailydc's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

5 stars for the vast content and research - it is so thorough and complicated topics are relatively easy to follow. 3 stars for my own lack of interest. Definitely the type of book to keep on a nightstand and read a little at a time over a long period rather than information overload in the course of a few weeks.

sumanmahato314's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

The best book of all time.

annefroukje's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging informative

4.5

rebeccazh's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

Getting through this book was a bit of a pain. Nonfiction is meant to provoke reflection and thinking but the author's writing is simplistic and seemed to strip out depth and nuance from topics. He also sounds blase about sensitive topics. I did learn lots of interesting facts but had to force myself to get through the chapters and ended up skipping some.

mopp's review against another edition

Go to review page

informative medium-paced

3.0

Hmm. Maybe the hype set an expectation the book was never going to meet. I enjoyed it, after a fashion. It took me two attempts to get going, initially it just didn't grab me enough. But then I pressed on, and found it less hard to pick up again. There's some wry humour, and more than a few subtle digs at various things. I wouldn't say those stylistic choices add or detract from the book. They are what they are (some made me chuckle). Being a brief history means plenty of topics might be a paragraph or two, or a page at most - some of which caused me to break off and go to find deeper material. Can't fault that. Maybe I just need to discuss it further with somebody to fully appreciate it. Is it "essential reading"