Scan barcode
angelsrgorgeous's review against another edition
3.0
I was not incredibly impressed. While I finished the book due to it's light-hearted and entertaining style, more than half of the book was a simple re-hashing of past "studies" (and often only anecdotes) that are very well known, reviewing the history of "soul-weighing" and ectoplasm/body cavity parlor tricks. Frankly, quite a bit of the book's beginning (some of the history of science's understanding of conception) didn't seem relate to the book's professed topic (the afterlife) at all. I found that a bit odd.
Overall, (partially due to the topic) almost the entire book focuses on pseudo-science, when I expected that it might explore newer findings in neuroscience, the interplay of mental illness and people's supposed "medium" abilities, the effects of drugs (both legal and illegal) and their correlations with people's experiences and expectations, etc. I simply expected that the book would focus on newer approaches and ideas instead of simply covering historical background.
I much more enjoyed the second half of the book, especially the foray into anesthesiology drugs' effects on cognitive function, clinical death, etc., but this was also fairly consistent with the rest of the book as almost as much of it seemed to focus on anecdotes, when I expected something a bit different.
I would have enjoyed it if she had made more of an effort to understand and explain the aspects of the quantum physics and biology that some of the scientists she interviewed based their theories on, but she carelessly seemed to toss this information aside with weak excuses. True, I understand that Quantum Physics is not something that you simply pick up, but she did have access to (what she considered) some of the world's foremost authorities on these theories. It seems that any good interviewer would have made a serious effort to understand the theories she was interviewing the experts about - to the point that she could have explained them in a simpler way, or at least summed them up a bit better for her audience. It sounds like she instead took some of their work home and, after trying to read it, simply gave up. I would have appreciated more details about these theories that she simply mentioned in passing, as they at least are "reputed" to be based on actual science. (The title says "Science" tackles the after life - right?)
Overall, the book was definitely entertaining - I mean, how could it not be when she has gone to a medium school and legitimately tried to develop her "talents", has subjected her brain to electromagnetic waves, was willing to try a powerful drug known to give people "visions" of the afterlife, and tries her best to record EVC's of the Donner party?
It truly is a wonderfully entertaining, though I think the title is a bit misleading.
Overall, (partially due to the topic) almost the entire book focuses on pseudo-science, when I expected that it might explore newer findings in neuroscience, the interplay of mental illness and people's supposed "medium" abilities, the effects of drugs (both legal and illegal) and their correlations with people's experiences and expectations, etc. I simply expected that the book would focus on newer approaches and ideas instead of simply covering historical background.
I much more enjoyed the second half of the book, especially the foray into anesthesiology drugs' effects on cognitive function, clinical death, etc., but this was also fairly consistent with the rest of the book as almost as much of it seemed to focus on anecdotes, when I expected something a bit different.
I would have enjoyed it if she had made more of an effort to understand and explain the aspects of the quantum physics and biology that some of the scientists she interviewed based their theories on, but she carelessly seemed to toss this information aside with weak excuses. True, I understand that Quantum Physics is not something that you simply pick up, but she did have access to (what she considered) some of the world's foremost authorities on these theories. It seems that any good interviewer would have made a serious effort to understand the theories she was interviewing the experts about - to the point that she could have explained them in a simpler way, or at least summed them up a bit better for her audience. It sounds like she instead took some of their work home and, after trying to read it, simply gave up. I would have appreciated more details about these theories that she simply mentioned in passing, as they at least are "reputed" to be based on actual science. (The title says "Science" tackles the after life - right?)
Overall, the book was definitely entertaining - I mean, how could it not be when she has gone to a medium school and legitimately tried to develop her "talents", has subjected her brain to electromagnetic waves, was willing to try a powerful drug known to give people "visions" of the afterlife, and tries her best to record EVC's of the Donner party?
It truly is a wonderfully entertaining, though I think the title is a bit misleading.
littleghostelli's review against another edition
1.0
I really wanted to like this, but ultimately couldn’t get through the writing, which is definitely of it’s time. What a lot of critics referred to as “wit” or “sharp humor” turned out to just be long, offensive and off-color jokes at the expense of individuals the author has deemed lesser than herself, for seemingly no reason other than not having a college education or belonging to a country she considers uncivilized. For someone who spends a lot of time assuring readers that she isn’t seeking or discredit or debunk, she makes it very clear from the first chapter that any ideas presented in this book regarding the afterlife are only being humored.
katieinca's review against another edition
3.0
There are some images and tidbits from this book that will stick with me for years, and a lot of it was fascinating. It was also a little more random than I expected, and tended to get off theme more than the average non-fiction book (like the author came across stuff in her research that she just couldn't not share - kind of cute, but distracting), but that tendency may have been exaggerated by the fact that I was listening to the book rather than reading it on paper. She says in the introduction that she's not interested in anecdote, and yet that's what much of the book is. Probably that was unavoidable given the subject matter, but ... well... revise the introduction, then.
Mostly it was fun, and interesting, but occasionally annoying, and the reader's tone was a bit too "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" for me at times.
Mostly it was fun, and interesting, but occasionally annoying, and the reader's tone was a bit too "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" for me at times.
dewey_scrapper's review against another edition
2.0
I really enjoyed Stiff, so I was excited to read Spook, but I was disappointed. It just wasn't as good as Stiff. I think the main problem was the reader of the audiobook. I know Mary Roach is known for her humor, but the reader was just over the top with her narration of the book. I'm sure I would have enjoyed it more if I had just read it.
libellum_aphrodite's review against another edition
2.0
I'm a big Mary Roach fan and would recommend anyone read anything that she has put down on paper, but this book just didn't do it for me. Mary brings her hallmark witty and conversational tone just like always, but the content here didn't quite do it for me. Her discussion of the afterlife spent a lot of time on tangents such as proving or disproving the validity of mediums and other methods of channeling the dead, which weren't very compelling or interesting to me.
mrswhite's review against another edition
3.0
Before writing this, her sophomore effort, Mary Roach (author of Stiff: The Curious Life of Human Cadavers) spent nearly a year traveling, interviewing, researching, and even enrolling in medium school, with the hopes of either proving or disproving the seemingly unprovable: the afterlife. With a keen sense of a humor, a scientific mind and a mostly skeptical point of view, Roach writes of her experiences traveling to India to investigate claims of reincarnation, exploring the theory that a body loses 21 grams (presumably, the weight of the human soul) after death, charts ectoplasm's strange history, follows ghosthunters as they try to track down spirits with infrared cameras and tape recorders, and more.
Unfortunately (fortunately?), Roach's year-long investigation produces no real proof of the existence of a soul or of the possibility of an afterlife, but even still her experiences are no less fascinating. It also doesn't hurt that she has a fairly well-developed sense of humor for a skeptic. And it's this skepticism that makes her final statements in the book's afterward that much more eyebrow-raising, as she ends her year-long, largely fruitless journey with these reflections:
I guess I believe that not everything we humans encounter in our lives can be neatly and convincingly tucked away inside the orderly cabinet of science...I believe in the possibility of something more...The debunkers are probably right, but they're no fun to visit a graveyard with. What the hell. I believe in ghosts.
And even though the book doesn't produce one iota of evidence to support her final claim, I have to say that I wholeheartedly agree. After all, isn't it simply more fun to believe than to not?
In sum, Spook - 'though far from spooky and a bit dry in spots - is a enjoyable, quirky read for skeptics and believers alike. (Although be warned that weak-stomached readers may just want to skip the chapter on ectoplasm. It's truly amazing how much cheesecloth a scam medium can fit into her most private places. Ick!)
Unfortunately (fortunately?), Roach's year-long investigation produces no real proof of the existence of a soul or of the possibility of an afterlife, but even still her experiences are no less fascinating. It also doesn't hurt that she has a fairly well-developed sense of humor for a skeptic. And it's this skepticism that makes her final statements in the book's afterward that much more eyebrow-raising, as she ends her year-long, largely fruitless journey with these reflections:
I guess I believe that not everything we humans encounter in our lives can be neatly and convincingly tucked away inside the orderly cabinet of science...I believe in the possibility of something more...The debunkers are probably right, but they're no fun to visit a graveyard with. What the hell. I believe in ghosts.
And even though the book doesn't produce one iota of evidence to support her final claim, I have to say that I wholeheartedly agree. After all, isn't it simply more fun to believe than to not?
In sum, Spook - 'though far from spooky and a bit dry in spots - is a enjoyable, quirky read for skeptics and believers alike. (Although be warned that weak-stomached readers may just want to skip the chapter on ectoplasm. It's truly amazing how much cheesecloth a scam medium can fit into her most private places. Ick!)
eidelonn's review against another edition
5.0
I began reading Spook almost immediately after I finished Mary Roach’s book Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers.
Her humor & charming narrative style continued in following Science as it Tackled the Afterlife.
I think this book has a lot to offer to staunch skeptics & paranormal enthusiasts alike.
Her humor & charming narrative style continued in following Science as it Tackled the Afterlife.
I think this book has a lot to offer to staunch skeptics & paranormal enthusiasts alike.