Scan barcode
Reviews tagging 'Death'
Talking to Strangers: What We Should Know about the People We Don't Know by Malcolm Gladwell
25 reviews
zydecovivo's review against another edition
informative
reflective
tense
slow-paced
3.0
I learned about Malcolm Gladwell through his podcast, Revisionist History. Because of that, I prefer to listen to his books. This one in particular includes interviews, music, and recreated court scenes that I find helpful for keeping my attention. If you are coming into this blind, Gladwell has a way of writing and speaking that is very matter-of-fact and blunt. He intertwines history with personal interviews and studies to illustrate his points, which are usually out of the box or defy convention. He writes as if his answer is the correct, obvious, and logical conclusion. So if you disagree with his assessment of a situation, I can understand why it would be upsetting. This particular book covers some darker topics, such as police brutality, sexual assault, and suicide, and Gladwell’s characteristic tone doesn’t quite bring the empathy I think is needed to approach them. However, he does raise interesting points and provides new ways of thinking about how we communicate, how we trust or distrust, and how we think about others. The overall ideas are interesting and worth talking about, but if you are not in the right headspace to face some graphic descriptions of assault, put this off for a little while.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Torture, Suicide, Suicidal thoughts, Sexual assault, Police brutality, and Suicide attempt
Moderate: Addiction, Drug abuse, Racism, Child abuse, Death, Medical trauma, Hate crime, Mental illness, and Drug use
rystonlentil43's review against another edition
hopeful
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.25
Good interesting book—I like how much information was fit in without losing track of the core framework. I don't think every idea was carried out to a satisfying conclusion, though technically nothing was promised that wasn't followed through on.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Child abuse, Torture, Pedophilia, and Suicide
Moderate: Alcohol, Police brutality, Rape, Death, and Gun violence
easta98's review against another edition
dark
emotional
informative
tense
medium-paced
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual assault, Rape, Murder, Pedophilia, and Death
Moderate: Alcoholism, Miscarriage, and Police brutality
fkshg8465's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
informative
sad
medium-paced
1.0
I may be one of the few people who really dislike Malcolm Gladwell. Why do I keep trying to read Malcolm Gladwell's books? Ugh. I should really ban him from my reading list. He's a great storyteller, but to me, that's all he is. I find him lacking in critical thinking and full of biases in his writing. I find this dangerous because other people may go I may be one of the few people who really dislike Malcolm Gladwell. Why do I keep trying to read Malcolm Gladwell's books? Ugh. I should really ban him from my reading list.
He's a great storyteller, but to me, that's all he is. I find him lacking in critical thinking and full of biases in his writing. I find this dangerous because other people may go along without giving it much thought, precisely because he is a great storyteller. I'm so frustrated by his conclusions that have little or no basis. I'm sure he researched everything, and presenting facts is fine, but when he draws conclusions on those facts without backing any of it up or without having demonstrated any logic behind it, I get mad.
I find him dangerous because he leads people to his conclusions without room for doubt when he uses words like, “obviously” to jump to a conclusion that may or may not be logical and in some cases are clearly biased by western outlooks (I see it as the equivalent of mental grooming). In one chapter, he shows a picture of a face he thinks is clearly angry, but in actuality, it can be just as easily interpreted as a confused or frustrated face. Yet, because his standards of correctness is his own interpretation, and because the rest of the argument as based on it, the critical logic falls apart for me.
I also hated that he put rape on trial. Women and victims have a hard enough time being believed, and with his dangerous way of presenting, he’s now given people more reasons to doubt.
One of my own triggers is the police epidemic in the US, and I didn’t appreciate his past treatment of this topic in the other books I’ve read by him, especially because he’s half Black. He seemed to lack sensitivity, and it angered me. He did better in this book, but I hated his treatment of trying to understand Brian Encinia from page one. I admit my own anti Gladwell biases popped up over and over again while reading the book and that it probably was a better book than it felt like for that reason. I only read this book because it was on a must-read list. Never again. Even if just to preserve my own mental health. This man triggers me more than the topics in his books. Henceforth, he’s banned from my future reading list!along without giving it much thought because he is a great storyteller. I'm so frustrated by his conclusions that have little or no basis. I'm sure he researched everything, and presenting facts is fine, but when he draws conclusions on those facts without backing any of it up or without having demonstrated any logic behind it, I get mad. he uses the same examples from book to book. Where’s his originality??
I find him dangerous because he leads people to his conclusions without room for doubt when he uses words like, “obviously” to jump to a conclusion that may or may not be logical and in some cases are clearly biased by western outlooks (I see it as the equivalent of mental grooming). In one chapter, he shows a picture of a face he thinks is clearly angry, but in actuality, it can be just as easily interpreted as a confused or frustrated face. Yet because his standards of correctness is his own interpretation, and because the rest of the argument as based on it, the critical logic falls apart for me.
I also hated that he put rape on trial. Women and vocations have a hard enough time being believed, and with his dangerous way of presenting, he’s now given people more reasons to doubt.
One of my own triggers is the police epidemic in the US, and I didn’t appreciate his past treatment of this topic in the other books I’ve read by him, especially because he’s half Black. He seemed to lack sensitivity, and it angered me. He did better in this book, but I hated his treatment of trying to understand Brian Encinia from page one. I admit my own anti Gladwell biases popped up over and over again while reading the book and that it probably was a better book than it felt like for that reason. I only read this book because it was on a must-read list. Never again. Even if just to preserve my own mental health. This man triggers me more than the topics in his books. Henceforth, he’s banned from my future reading list!
He's a great storyteller, but to me, that's all he is. I find him lacking in critical thinking and full of biases in his writing. I find this dangerous because other people may go along without giving it much thought, precisely because he is a great storyteller. I'm so frustrated by his conclusions that have little or no basis. I'm sure he researched everything, and presenting facts is fine, but when he draws conclusions on those facts without backing any of it up or without having demonstrated any logic behind it, I get mad.
I find him dangerous because he leads people to his conclusions without room for doubt when he uses words like, “obviously” to jump to a conclusion that may or may not be logical and in some cases are clearly biased by western outlooks (I see it as the equivalent of mental grooming). In one chapter, he shows a picture of a face he thinks is clearly angry, but in actuality, it can be just as easily interpreted as a confused or frustrated face. Yet, because his standards of correctness is his own interpretation, and because the rest of the argument as based on it, the critical logic falls apart for me.
I also hated that he put rape on trial. Women and victims have a hard enough time being believed, and with his dangerous way of presenting, he’s now given people more reasons to doubt.
One of my own triggers is the police epidemic in the US, and I didn’t appreciate his past treatment of this topic in the other books I’ve read by him, especially because he’s half Black. He seemed to lack sensitivity, and it angered me. He did better in this book, but I hated his treatment of trying to understand Brian Encinia from page one. I admit my own anti Gladwell biases popped up over and over again while reading the book and that it probably was a better book than it felt like for that reason. I only read this book because it was on a must-read list. Never again. Even if just to preserve my own mental health. This man triggers me more than the topics in his books. Henceforth, he’s banned from my future reading list!along without giving it much thought because he is a great storyteller. I'm so frustrated by his conclusions that have little or no basis. I'm sure he researched everything, and presenting facts is fine, but when he draws conclusions on those facts without backing any of it up or without having demonstrated any logic behind it, I get mad. he uses the same examples from book to book. Where’s his originality??
I find him dangerous because he leads people to his conclusions without room for doubt when he uses words like, “obviously” to jump to a conclusion that may or may not be logical and in some cases are clearly biased by western outlooks (I see it as the equivalent of mental grooming). In one chapter, he shows a picture of a face he thinks is clearly angry, but in actuality, it can be just as easily interpreted as a confused or frustrated face. Yet because his standards of correctness is his own interpretation, and because the rest of the argument as based on it, the critical logic falls apart for me.
I also hated that he put rape on trial. Women and vocations have a hard enough time being believed, and with his dangerous way of presenting, he’s now given people more reasons to doubt.
One of my own triggers is the police epidemic in the US, and I didn’t appreciate his past treatment of this topic in the other books I’ve read by him, especially because he’s half Black. He seemed to lack sensitivity, and it angered me. He did better in this book, but I hated his treatment of trying to understand Brian Encinia from page one. I admit my own anti Gladwell biases popped up over and over again while reading the book and that it probably was a better book than it felt like for that reason. I only read this book because it was on a must-read list. Never again. Even if just to preserve my own mental health. This man triggers me more than the topics in his books. Henceforth, he’s banned from my future reading list!
Content Warnings
Graphic: Antisemitism, Pedophilia, Rape, Bullying, Injury/Injury detail, Panic attacks/disorders, Police brutality, Sexual content, Suicidal thoughts, Suicide attempt, Miscarriage, Mental illness, Schizophrenia/Psychosis , Self harm, Suicide, War, Racism, Adult/minor relationship, Forced institutionalization, Alcohol, Confinement, Death, Gun violence, Sexual assault, and Violence
cartermon4's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
informative
reflective
slow-paced
4.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Violence, Suicide, Suicidal thoughts, Rape, Murder, Gun violence, Death, and Police brutality
Moderate: War and Racism
Minor: Deportation
Audiobook was an interesting experience- added audio and sounds make it more involved.saskiahill's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
3.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship, Death, Medical trauma, Racism, Rape, Sexual assault, Sexual content, Suicidal thoughts, Torture, Pedophilia, Police brutality, Violence, Self harm, Child abuse, Physical abuse, and Suicide
Moderate: Alcohol and Gun violence
antireading's review against another edition
1.25
I feel as though Gladwell ignores other factors to the discussions he brings up, most especially race, gender, and their intersections. He drills down everything to miscommunication but doesn't bring up the fact that many are predisposed to not wanting to be truthful in communication with women, with Black people, etc. It is not JUST because of policing practices that Black people get pulled over, but it is because of a bias against them and the communities that are over-policed. It felt like he was oversimplifying a lot.
The section on Jerry Sandusky and Brock Turner was gross. He treated CIA operatives who invented torture tactics with more care than victims of rape. He seemed to outright disbelieve the victims of Sandusky and chalk up Turner's rape to a "miscommunication" due to alcohol. He calls most sexual harassment on college campuses miscommunications due to alcohol and hazy rules of consent, while also acknowledging that 1 in 5 female college students report being sexually harassed. He also says the problem is equally with the men raping and the alcohol. Alcohol is a large chunk of the book for no apparent reason as it doesn't tie into the main Sandra Bland storyline like other issues do at the end. I wasn't interested in hearing excuses for a man raping an unconscious woman, but apparently, women should have known better.
The medium of an audiobook was interesting as Gladwell aimed to make it a high-quality podcast. That fell short when I had issues understanding snippets of the audio from various types of recording equipment, age of recordings, accents, and speeds of talking. I found myself just drowning out those snippets, especially when listening in the car, as the jumpiness of quality was too distracting. I feel like the description, while it technically does describe what happened, didn't really feel like the book as I was getting into it. It was very much interconnected stories but I thought those points would be briefly brought up, not dedicating whole chapters to it.
The section on Jerry Sandusky and Brock Turner was gross. He treated CIA operatives who invented torture tactics with more care than victims of rape. He seemed to outright disbelieve the victims of Sandusky and chalk up Turner's rape to a "miscommunication" due to alcohol. He calls most sexual harassment on college campuses miscommunications due to alcohol and hazy rules of consent, while also acknowledging that 1 in 5 female college students report being sexually harassed. He also says the problem is equally with the men raping and the alcohol. Alcohol is a large chunk of the book for no apparent reason as it doesn't tie into the main Sandra Bland storyline like other issues do at the end. I wasn't interested in hearing excuses for a man raping an unconscious woman, but apparently, women should have known better.
The medium of an audiobook was interesting as Gladwell aimed to make it a high-quality podcast. That fell short when I had issues understanding snippets of the audio from various types of recording equipment, age of recordings, accents, and speeds of talking. I found myself just drowning out those snippets, especially when listening in the car, as the jumpiness of quality was too distracting. I feel like the description, while it technically does describe what happened, didn't really feel like the book as I was getting into it. It was very much interconnected stories but I thought those points would be briefly brought up, not dedicating whole chapters to it.
Content Warnings
Graphic: War, Alcohol, Suicide attempt, Death, Racism, Suicidal thoughts, Police brutality, Violence, Adult/minor relationship, Child abuse, Murder, Sexual harassment, Sexual violence, Suicide, Alcoholism, Classism, Confinement, Genocide, Gun violence, Sexual assault, Sexual content, Torture, and Rape
Minor: Vomit and Child death
artsandcraftsmajor's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
fast-paced
4.5
Compelling, but left unsure of how to move forward. Feels important.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Sexual violence, Violence, Suicide, Death, Sexual assault, Police brutality, Racism, Rape, Suicide attempt, and Emotional abuse
sidekicksam's review against another edition
2.25
A re-read of a book I read back in 2020, after the pandemic caused both a lot of isolation and division. People were literally keeping their distance, interacting less with strangers, but the summer of '20 also had some very painful revelations and awakenings for the race and equality discussions.
Reading it again, I feel refreshed in the theories he outlines in the book. The 3 problems we have when encountering strangers (defaulting to the assumption that people can be trusted; thinking people's feelings always match their appearance and our inability to judge correctly whether someone is lying or the mismatch is happening; and that context is vital but also underappreciated) are a few that kept me curious, thinking and will stay with me in the back of my mind in encounters with strangers. Interesting food for thought and definitely contemplations that will stay with me.
That being said, I am uneasy with some of the examples Gladwell decided to explore to prove his points. I already had some question marks during my re-read, but after reading multiple 1-star reviews (which have gained 1,000+ likes) on the first page, I'm seriously reconsidering whether this book is good enough to be read on its own (without the accompanying guide/reviews to also challenge the examples given).
To use cases of rape and child molestation and trying to explain away the motives of witnesses or even instigators of the crimes is just... what? Why would you invalidate experiences of trauma instead of exploring the faulty assumptions on which we make errors (the cases of the Cuban spies in the CIA were much more compelling I think).
Example: Brock Turner raping a passed out drunk girl on campus is explained away by their (mutual) excessive drinking and misinterpeted signals - I have never had to explain to any of my boyfriends that no means no (and that if I don't wake up or respond that is also a big fucking NO).
Not taking the prejudice of race into consideration when discussing Sandra Bland's case, but explaining it away to miscommunication... especially with police brutality against Black people blowing up in the media in recent years, it's just harrowing.
I'm happy I don't just read books but also review them, because I may not have gotten further in my evaluation than 'whoo interesting material' without re-evaluating also the icky (and blatantly wrong) bits.
Read it at your own volition, but do heed my warning.
Reading it again, I feel refreshed in the theories he outlines in the book. The 3 problems we have when encountering strangers (defaulting to the assumption that people can be trusted; thinking people's feelings always match their appearance and our inability to judge correctly whether someone is lying or the mismatch is happening; and that context is vital but also underappreciated) are a few that kept me curious, thinking and will stay with me in the back of my mind in encounters with strangers. Interesting food for thought and definitely contemplations that will stay with me.
That being said, I am uneasy with some of the examples Gladwell decided to explore to prove his points. I already had some question marks during my re-read, but after reading multiple 1-star reviews (which have gained 1,000+ likes) on the first page, I'm seriously reconsidering whether this book is good enough to be read on its own (without the accompanying guide/reviews to also challenge the examples given).
To use cases of rape and child molestation and trying to explain away the motives of witnesses or even instigators of the crimes is just... what? Why would you invalidate experiences of trauma instead of exploring the faulty assumptions on which we make errors (the cases of the Cuban spies in the CIA were much more compelling I think).
Example: Brock Turner raping a passed out drunk girl on campus is explained away by their (mutual) excessive drinking and misinterpeted signals - I have never had to explain to any of my boyfriends that no means no (and that if I don't wake up or respond that is also a big fucking NO).
Not taking the prejudice of race into consideration when discussing Sandra Bland's case, but explaining it away to miscommunication... especially with police brutality against Black people blowing up in the media in recent years, it's just harrowing.
I'm happy I don't just read books but also review them, because I may not have gotten further in my evaluation than 'whoo interesting material' without re-evaluating also the icky (and blatantly wrong) bits.
Read it at your own volition, but do heed my warning.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Racism, Rape, Sexual assault, Torture, Child abuse, Hate crime, Sexual violence, War, Murder, Physical abuse, Police brutality, Racial slurs, Sexual harassment, Suicide, Confinement, Death, and Alcohol
bjdarby's review
slow-paced
1.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual content, Sexual assault, Racism, Police brutality, Adult/minor relationship, Suicide, Sexual harassment, Sexism, Rape, Child abuse, Misogyny, Pedophilia, Death, Violence, and Sexual violence