You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
farahbear 's review for:
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values
by Robert M. Pirsig
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I can’t believe I read all this. There was several times where I thought about not finishing. But I powered through.
I think this book irritates me. And it’s because it reads as pseudointellectual, and the narrator is honestly very arrogant. I do think the narrator makes some interesting points, but he often overgeneralizes or comes to conclusions I won’t have. He also sometimes does not give enough context to make his points, so you end up lost, and try to reread over and over certain sections (or in my case, research the context for yourself). Also, I hate his anti-science take. Also, I didn’t understand why he seemed to despise the concept of rhetoric? Or maybe he was okay with it? Idk.
And it was real confusing trying to parse what he was trying to say about Quality; he kept defining it and then re-defining, and then claiming it should be undefined. It honestly was a little stupid and felt like a waste.
The ending was interesting though. I’m not sure how I feel about it, but seeing the narrator’s descent into madness is truly sad, especially as he struggles to stay with his son, and not become divided by it. But damn, he was such an awful father; he basically has no sympathy for his son, so it was hard to even believe it was struggle.
I could probably go on and on about other aspects of this book; he delves into stuff like “classical vs romantic” understanding; and tries to give advice on how to get “unstuck” or how to deal with “gumption traps” as he calls it. But I don’t have enough time for that. Maybe I’ll write an essay in my free time and post it somewhere, idk.
But overall, I’m not the biggest fan. This book, I feel, is only for the author and no one else; like it's his unfiltered thoughts, and he hasn't even formed his own conclusion from them.
I keep bouncing between a 1 star to 2 stars; ultimately, I rounded up because it, at the very least, it got me thinking and researching (despite its convoluted, pretentious nature).
I think this book irritates me. And it’s because it reads as pseudointellectual, and the narrator is honestly very arrogant. I do think the narrator makes some interesting points, but he often overgeneralizes or comes to conclusions I won’t have. He also sometimes does not give enough context to make his points, so you end up lost, and try to reread over and over certain sections (or in my case, research the context for yourself). Also, I hate his anti-science take. Also, I didn’t understand why he seemed to despise the concept of rhetoric? Or maybe he was okay with it? Idk.
And it was real confusing trying to parse what he was trying to say about Quality; he kept defining it and then re-defining, and then claiming it should be undefined. It honestly was a little stupid and felt like a waste.
The ending was interesting though. I’m not sure how I feel about it, but seeing the narrator’s descent into madness is truly sad, especially as he struggles to stay with his son, and not become divided by it. But damn, he was such an awful father; he basically has no sympathy for his son, so it was hard to even believe it was struggle.
I could probably go on and on about other aspects of this book; he delves into stuff like “classical vs romantic” understanding; and tries to give advice on how to get “unstuck” or how to deal with “gumption traps” as he calls it. But I don’t have enough time for that. Maybe I’ll write an essay in my free time and post it somewhere, idk.
But overall, I’m not the biggest fan. This book, I feel, is only for the author and no one else; like it's his unfiltered thoughts, and he hasn't even formed his own conclusion from them.
I keep bouncing between a 1 star to 2 stars; ultimately, I rounded up because it, at the very least, it got me thinking and researching (despite its convoluted, pretentious nature).