Scan barcode
ln_ze's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
4.5
mattinthebooks's review against another edition
5.0
I have so much to say about this book that I won't because it ruins the value of reading it yourself. I recommend wholeheartedly taking an afternoon to dive into this work of (fittingly) art and love. My view of love has been influenced by this book more than anything else I've read in the past few months.
flavoredcurry's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
5.0
liviaonbooks's review against another edition
1.0
I received this book as a gift, complete with an inscription on the first page of the book. That is as far as my sentiments to this book goes. Page 32 is the furthest I am willing to go, simply due to the sheer amount of clashing principles, values and opinions I have with the author.
Published in 1956, it really shows in the writing. Most of the concepts he has written are outdated and irrelevant to the contemporary society I find myself in. I have trouble getting through one page without annotating and making my own comments in the margins of the book, peppered with "I do not agree with this" or "...what??" or my favourite, "LOL" when the author made his homophobic sentiments very clear on the pages.
Another glaring problem of this book is that there are no empirical results to back the many, main claims that he has written throughout the book. I personally read anthologies of the great minds from the previous centuries and current thinkers, however, I do not find this book to be appropriate without its empirical standing.
In short, this book bothers me so much because I find it to be filled with annoying, irrelevant and outdated notions, which are very Christian/Catholic in its values, on top of having a very Eurocentric view. I have nothing against the last point, however, I find it rather unsuitable for this specific application. As a citizen of the world (I'd like to think), I shall not torture myself with going past page 32. Shelved as DNF.
The only great thing is the book cover of the edition I have, which is typographical and has whimsical serif accents on some of the letters.
Published in 1956, it really shows in the writing. Most of the concepts he has written are outdated and irrelevant to the contemporary society I find myself in. I have trouble getting through one page without annotating and making my own comments in the margins of the book, peppered with "I do not agree with this" or "...what??" or my favourite, "LOL" when the author made his homophobic sentiments very clear on the pages.
Another glaring problem of this book is that there are no empirical results to back the many, main claims that he has written throughout the book. I personally read anthologies of the great minds from the previous centuries and current thinkers, however, I do not find this book to be appropriate without its empirical standing.
In short, this book bothers me so much because I find it to be filled with annoying, irrelevant and outdated notions, which are very Christian/Catholic in its values, on top of having a very Eurocentric view. I have nothing against the last point, however, I find it rather unsuitable for this specific application. As a citizen of the world (I'd like to think), I shall not torture myself with going past page 32. Shelved as DNF.
The only great thing is the book cover of the edition I have, which is typographical and has whimsical serif accents on some of the letters.
ritona's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
Excluding the homofobia and other not very good things, it hives an insight on how capitalism and society affects our relationships and what is love and all the types.
aleksandraborenovic's review against another edition
3.0
I found it a bit boring because I knew all of this from The Sane Society or from his other works, so this book seems rushed and too commercial. It's not bad, it's just... not enough? Maybe not enough explanations for his theories?