Scan barcode
A review by nashwa017
Everything is F*cked: A Book About Hope by Mark Manson
2.0
So I’m not criticising this book because it’s super hyped. I actually really like Mark Manson’s writing but this is not his best work to say this least. I recommended "The Subtle Art" to so many of my coworkers, because we wanted to believe that this miserable job won't define our careers. We all really hated that job.
But anyway, let’s start with the audiobook which is my favourite way to consume nonfiction. The narration for this book was not good, which is a surprise because the author narrated it himself. Usually, authors narrating their own books are great but for some reason, Manson was robotic, failing to emphasise on his own points and there were many instances where the punchlines to his own jokes were delivered badly. Trudging through 4 hours of this, I switched to the physical book and honestly it wasn’t much better.
The whole point of this book was lost on me because there was no visible link between the chapters and the idea of hope seemed to get lost in all the other things he chose to talk about. While reading/listening to this, I kept wondering to myself “Mark, what the fuck are you actually on about?” It’s a Mark Manson book, a certain level of profanity is allowed.
I was expecting it be more like his first book where he based it on his experience. This one seems like drawing from an accumulation of surface-level knowledge, and sometimes stretching it too far to make it fit with the theme. I was expecting the second half of the book to talk about the lack of hope, and how to live without it as was specified- what I got were entire chapters on moral philosophy. We had Nietzsche, Kant and Plato. Now I don’t mind philosophies being used or referred to, but if I wanted to read philosophy, I would read a philosophy book. There are people who have written about it, and done it better than Manson. This also makes me think that the marketing for this book was misguided.
I think Manson’s first book took off because it was better but also because the idea of "sweary" books was somewhat new. Now that the novelty has worn off, the excessive use of profanity was not appealing. Not to mention that Manson is being condescending in this writing, instead of being quirky. I've never used the word "mansplaining" but I believe it applies perfectly in this scenario.
Needless to say, quite the disappointment. Mark, go sit in the corner and think about what you’ve done.
But anyway, let’s start with the audiobook which is my favourite way to consume nonfiction. The narration for this book was not good, which is a surprise because the author narrated it himself. Usually, authors narrating their own books are great but for some reason, Manson was robotic, failing to emphasise on his own points and there were many instances where the punchlines to his own jokes were delivered badly. Trudging through 4 hours of this, I switched to the physical book and honestly it wasn’t much better.
The whole point of this book was lost on me because there was no visible link between the chapters and the idea of hope seemed to get lost in all the other things he chose to talk about. While reading/listening to this, I kept wondering to myself “Mark, what the fuck are you actually on about?” It’s a Mark Manson book, a certain level of profanity is allowed.
I was expecting it be more like his first book where he based it on his experience. This one seems like drawing from an accumulation of surface-level knowledge, and sometimes stretching it too far to make it fit with the theme. I was expecting the second half of the book to talk about the lack of hope, and how to live without it as was specified- what I got were entire chapters on moral philosophy. We had Nietzsche, Kant and Plato. Now I don’t mind philosophies being used or referred to, but if I wanted to read philosophy, I would read a philosophy book. There are people who have written about it, and done it better than Manson. This also makes me think that the marketing for this book was misguided.
I think Manson’s first book took off because it was better but also because the idea of "sweary" books was somewhat new. Now that the novelty has worn off, the excessive use of profanity was not appealing. Not to mention that Manson is being condescending in this writing, instead of being quirky. I've never used the word "mansplaining" but I believe it applies perfectly in this scenario.
Needless to say, quite the disappointment. Mark, go sit in the corner and think about what you’ve done.