Scan barcode
A review by angelsrgorgeous
Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife by Mary Roach
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.