Scan barcode
A review by domskeac
Soul Boom: Why We Need a Spiritual Revolution by Rainn Wilson
3.0
I am impressed overall with the intentionality and self-awareness Rainn Wilson has as a rich white man writing something supposedly unique about religion and spirituality. He’s clearly a kind person who has a lot of hope and I like him a lot.
A few things I found hard to get past:
-You can’t acknowledge that “he” pronouns for God are problematic (and also monotheistic?!) when the singular “they” is staring you in the face; rookie mistake that constantly pulled me out of his analysis. I wish he’d live into what he claimed about God and gender. It’s such an easy commitment when publishing written words.
-Chapter 6 about going to Israel was incredibly simplistic in its description of the land and its relationship to religion—especially since it ended with a lesson on avoiding individualistic lives versus communal lives. His experience of Israel was completely individualistic and devoid of the apartheid context of the people living there. This was the turn where I found myself disliking the book due to his so very-surface-level analysis. It made me distrust his credibility and felt too fluffy. He’s so close to a really captivating ask for humanity, but he didn’t go there.
-His alien dialogue was great/funny (would listen to that podcast!), but as someone married to a SETI researcher, I hated how he set it up as saying that the presence of UAPs = aliens are here on earth observing us. That again made me distrust his research. Yes, there are aliens; no they are probably not close enough to be watch us as UAPs. UAPs are probably military stuff.
-Speaking of the military, I am surprised there was little-to-no talk of pacifism or peacemaking in his new religion. He even described the perfect world at the end as something along the lines of “countries only having enough arms for defense.” What?! In his wildest dreams he still thinks people need to arm themselves with violence? That was a miss for me. If arguments for pacifism were there, I missed them.
-His chapter on protests was bonkers! He quips “less protests, more action” as if protests are divorced from direct action, mutual aid, political education, and advocacy. What?!? Protests are a huge part of the system of change and are absolutely connected to action. Again, this analysis made me distrust his actual relationship to the topic he was critiquing. I wish he knew some of the protesters I know.
A few things I found hard to get past:
-You can’t acknowledge that “he” pronouns for God are problematic (and also monotheistic?!) when the singular “they” is staring you in the face; rookie mistake that constantly pulled me out of his analysis. I wish he’d live into what he claimed about God and gender. It’s such an easy commitment when publishing written words.
-Chapter 6 about going to Israel was incredibly simplistic in its description of the land and its relationship to religion—especially since it ended with a lesson on avoiding individualistic lives versus communal lives. His experience of Israel was completely individualistic and devoid of the apartheid context of the people living there. This was the turn where I found myself disliking the book due to his so very-surface-level analysis. It made me distrust his credibility and felt too fluffy. He’s so close to a really captivating ask for humanity, but he didn’t go there.
-His alien dialogue was great/funny (would listen to that podcast!), but as someone married to a SETI researcher, I hated how he set it up as saying that the presence of UAPs = aliens are here on earth observing us. That again made me distrust his research. Yes, there are aliens; no they are probably not close enough to be watch us as UAPs. UAPs are probably military stuff.
-Speaking of the military, I am surprised there was little-to-no talk of pacifism or peacemaking in his new religion. He even described the perfect world at the end as something along the lines of “countries only having enough arms for defense.” What?! In his wildest dreams he still thinks people need to arm themselves with violence? That was a miss for me. If arguments for pacifism were there, I missed them.
-His chapter on protests was bonkers! He quips “less protests, more action” as if protests are divorced from direct action, mutual aid, political education, and advocacy. What?!? Protests are a huge part of the system of change and are absolutely connected to action. Again, this analysis made me distrust his actual relationship to the topic he was critiquing. I wish he knew some of the protesters I know.