Scan barcode
shelfreflectionofficial's reviews
805 reviews
Like Mother, Like Daughter by Kimberly McCreight
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
“I did what I do best: I made the problem go away.”
I’d been putting this one off for no apparent reason and I finally pushed myself to read it and I’m glad I did!
This was a good thriller, but would have been better with less swearing. I definitely figured out aspects of it but not everything. McCreight did a good job of putting out new evidence or suspects to think about that make you forget about your previous theories. There were a couple surprises!
This is one of those books that has a lot of elements in the writing to present different angles of the conflict where it could feel a bit jumbled.
My opinion of the book largely weighed on how the ending would go— can all these things work together? If the ending would have been unsatisfactory all of those extra elements would have felt distracting and cumbersome, but since I thought the ending went really well, those elements were pulled together in a way that made sense.
I agree with another reviewer that it would be better not to read the full Goodreads summary before reading the book. So here’s the basic plot:
Cleo, a college student, arrives home to find food burning in the oven, blood on the floor, and her mother missing without a trace. The pair had become estranged as Cleo felt her mom, Katrina— who was a corporate lawyer and ‘fixer’, was overbearing and controlling. As Cleo unravels the puzzle of her mother’s life and past, she realizes there was a reason for her mother’s ‘madness.’
“I never saw my mom as a full person separate from me. And now that she’s a person who’s missing, I may never have the chance.”
The book contains ‘present’ chapters from Cleo’s POV— titled by the number of hours her mom had been missing, ‘past’ chapters from Katrina’s POV— titled by the number of days before she disappeared, excerpts from court documents from a case her mother was working, text conversations between a couple unknown people, excerpts from therapy sessions Cleo went to, diary entries from Katrina’s childhood, and a few newspaper and Reddit articles.
The main characters aren’t particularly likeable, but McCreight puts a lot of effort into drawing you in and becoming invested in their story because of their strained relationship. You feel the burden of a mother trying to connect with her daughter, doing everything she can to help her daughter and wanting what’s best for her. You also feel Cleo’s teenage (aka ignorant) resistance to that control and her gradual realization that her mother does care for her and her flaws come from a place of pain that she didn’t know about.
You see where things went wrong and you really want Cleo to find her mom alive so they can become reconciled. As a mom, it’s one of my fears that my kids will grow up and make bad choices or not want to be around me or care what I think about anything so I tended to feel more empathy for Katrina.
I just don’t understand the whole ‘I don’t like how my mom treats me so I’m going to go do the worst things and deal drugs just to piss her off’ kind of thing. Why is this a good idea?! And if you know it’s not, why don’t you care?!
I was glad to see that Cleo wasn’t so stubborn that she would be completely oblivious to the truths she discovered. And even though she made a few questionable choices in her investigation, I’m glad she wasn’t so stupid as to completely leave the police out of everything.
“I try not to squirm under the weight of her stare, knowing I need to come clean. It’s not too late to start telling the actual truth for once in my whole stupid life.”
The title insinuates that the mother and daughter are the same in some way. Their differences are made clear from the start:
Katrina: “I was excellent at doing. I wasn’t so good at feeling.”
Cleo: “I love messy things. I am a messy thing. Messy and confused and irrational and overemotional. But at least I feel things. I feel everything.”
But as the story continues you realize they have some things in common.
This might be a bit of a spoiler: (view spoiler)
Last thing- unless I missed something, I would like to know how the money squabble ended. Did she ever get her money back? That probably should have been included in the Epilogue…
Recommendation
I did enjoy this thriller a lot and read it pretty quickly. Because of all the swearing, I’m not sure if I will read more of hers, but for some reason the swearing didn’t feel as jarring in this context as it has in others. I’m not sure why, but that’s just my initial reflection after reading it.
I always enjoy a thriller that I can’t completely figure out, at least right away.
If you can handle the swearing, I would definitely recommend. If you try to avoid swearing, then this may not be the right book for you, but I’ll let you decide. I’ve definitely read books worse than this in that department but everyone has their own convictions.
[Content Advisory: 65 f-words, 41 s-words, 8 b-words; rape; a couple very brief sex scenes]
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
I’d been putting this one off for no apparent reason and I finally pushed myself to read it and I’m glad I did!
This was a good thriller, but would have been better with less swearing. I definitely figured out aspects of it but not everything. McCreight did a good job of putting out new evidence or suspects to think about that make you forget about your previous theories. There were a couple surprises!
This is one of those books that has a lot of elements in the writing to present different angles of the conflict where it could feel a bit jumbled.
My opinion of the book largely weighed on how the ending would go— can all these things work together? If the ending would have been unsatisfactory all of those extra elements would have felt distracting and cumbersome, but since I thought the ending went really well, those elements were pulled together in a way that made sense.
I agree with another reviewer that it would be better not to read the full Goodreads summary before reading the book. So here’s the basic plot:
Cleo, a college student, arrives home to find food burning in the oven, blood on the floor, and her mother missing without a trace. The pair had become estranged as Cleo felt her mom, Katrina— who was a corporate lawyer and ‘fixer’, was overbearing and controlling. As Cleo unravels the puzzle of her mother’s life and past, she realizes there was a reason for her mother’s ‘madness.’
“I never saw my mom as a full person separate from me. And now that she’s a person who’s missing, I may never have the chance.”
The book contains ‘present’ chapters from Cleo’s POV— titled by the number of hours her mom had been missing, ‘past’ chapters from Katrina’s POV— titled by the number of days before she disappeared, excerpts from court documents from a case her mother was working, text conversations between a couple unknown people, excerpts from therapy sessions Cleo went to, diary entries from Katrina’s childhood, and a few newspaper and Reddit articles.
The main characters aren’t particularly likeable, but McCreight puts a lot of effort into drawing you in and becoming invested in their story because of their strained relationship. You feel the burden of a mother trying to connect with her daughter, doing everything she can to help her daughter and wanting what’s best for her. You also feel Cleo’s teenage (aka ignorant) resistance to that control and her gradual realization that her mother does care for her and her flaws come from a place of pain that she didn’t know about.
You see where things went wrong and you really want Cleo to find her mom alive so they can become reconciled. As a mom, it’s one of my fears that my kids will grow up and make bad choices or not want to be around me or care what I think about anything so I tended to feel more empathy for Katrina.
I just don’t understand the whole ‘I don’t like how my mom treats me so I’m going to go do the worst things and deal drugs just to piss her off’ kind of thing. Why is this a good idea?! And if you know it’s not, why don’t you care?!
I was glad to see that Cleo wasn’t so stubborn that she would be completely oblivious to the truths she discovered. And even though she made a few questionable choices in her investigation, I’m glad she wasn’t so stupid as to completely leave the police out of everything.
“I try not to squirm under the weight of her stare, knowing I need to come clean. It’s not too late to start telling the actual truth for once in my whole stupid life.”
The title insinuates that the mother and daughter are the same in some way. Their differences are made clear from the start:
Katrina: “I was excellent at doing. I wasn’t so good at feeling.”
Cleo: “I love messy things. I am a messy thing. Messy and confused and irrational and overemotional. But at least I feel things. I feel everything.”
But as the story continues you realize they have some things in common.
This might be a bit of a spoiler: (view spoiler)
Last thing- unless I missed something, I would like to know how the money squabble ended. Did she ever get her money back? That probably should have been included in the Epilogue…
Recommendation
I did enjoy this thriller a lot and read it pretty quickly. Because of all the swearing, I’m not sure if I will read more of hers, but for some reason the swearing didn’t feel as jarring in this context as it has in others. I’m not sure why, but that’s just my initial reflection after reading it.
I always enjoy a thriller that I can’t completely figure out, at least right away.
If you can handle the swearing, I would definitely recommend. If you try to avoid swearing, then this may not be the right book for you, but I’ll let you decide. I’ve definitely read books worse than this in that department but everyone has their own convictions.
[Content Advisory: 65 f-words, 41 s-words, 8 b-words; rape; a couple very brief sex scenes]
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
Content Warnings
Graphic: Cursing
Moderate: Rape
Minor: Sexual content
The Vanishing Half by Brit Bennett
challenging
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
“She had been acting her entire life, which meant she was the best liar that she knew. Well, second best.”
“You can escape town, but you cannot escape blood. Somehow, the Vignes twins believed themselves capable of both.”
This book wasn’t really what I was expecting when I saw the title. I thought (because I didn’t read the summary and just knew the book was about twins) that one of a set of twins goes missing. They make it seem like that for about the first few sentences of the book but nope. The twins just skipped town.
So The Vanishing Half is not a thriller but a long drawn out look at twin sisters who move away from their hometown in search of a different life. They go their own ways, have daughters, and we see how their choices then in turn impact their daughters’ lives.
This book started out fine and I felt interested in how these sisters’ relationship was going to change and grow and how they would reconcile. But then it just felt like it was taking forever and then the sisters take a backseat as we spend a lot of time on the daughters. Every time you think you’re getting somewhere with one character, surprise! the next chapter is someone completely different.
When you read a thriller you kinda know where the story is going and when it’s about to be done. In this story, I just felt like I had no idea where it was going or when it was going to stop. And not in a mysterious way, just a… what are we even doing here? kind of way.
I agree with a lot of other reviewers that I would have preferred more focus on the sisters than the cousins and that they would have had more interaction and character development with each other. But we don’t really see them together until the last few pages and a few snippets here and there.
It did just feel like this book tried to do too much and so instead of doing one thing really well it did a lot of things but not so great.
The writing style was also pretty hard to follow at times. Lots of jumping around chronologically and adding backstories in the middle of present-day stories. For example, within a single paragraph she talks about what the character is doing, what the character is going to do in a year, and then backs up to a year prior to the present to share a little backstory. All in like 4-5 sentences! It’s just chronological whiplash and I don’t enjoy that style of writing.
There were also some poorly worded segues into new thoughts that the author wanted to include but apparently didn’t know how else to incorporate them into the story.
For example, one new paragraph started: “Here’s something she hadn’t thought about in forever:” And then she told a story about the past. It just didn’t feel creative or cogent.
Bennett would also start new sections or chapters without using names, only pronouns, so you had to figure out who this was about. But then she uses the name within a paragraph or two so it’s not like it was really supposed to be hidden, but now you have to go back and reread the ambiguous stuff once you got the name so you know what you were supposed to be getting from it all.
One other major disappointment: I liked Early’s character and that he was going to help Desiree find her sister, but he ended up being pretty inconsequential. He tried to find her, and then, he just couldn’t. Oh well.
Plus if Desiree’s husband really wanted to find her, he knew she was from Mallard. Even if he thought she would never go back, if you’ve looked everywhere else why wouldn’t you at least check? It would be super easy to pop on over to this super small town and see if she’s there. No bail bondsman required. But apparently checking the only other town she knows well was beyond him. Doesn’t make any sense.
Again, not super important to the unfolding of the plot since this wasn’t a thriller, but feels like a plot hole that was just ignored.
Popular Themes
The most talked about themes of this book are the ideas of race, colorism, and passing.
The twins are light-skinned blacks living a whole little town of similarly colored people who look down on dark-colored blacks.
When the twins leave town, one ends up marrying a really dark-skinned man and the other one ends up moving to California and passing as a white woman.
The twin who comes back, Desiree, is fleeing an abusive husband and returns to town with her dark-skinned daughter, Jude. They have to face the discrimination in town for all of Jude’s childhood. But we don’t get much of that because Jude’s part of the story jumps ahead to when she goes away to college.
The twin in California, Stella, had realized that she had more access to things and opportunities if people thought she was white. (A lot of this story takes place during the 60s and 70s.) There was segregation and discrimination against black people and so she saw a way to live the life she wanted. But it required her to ‘act white.’ She realizes that befriending black people would blow her cover so we see the cost of her lie in many ways. Her daughter, Kennedy, grows up in this privileged, wealthy environment without any knowledge of where her mother came from which has caused a big rift in their relationship.
‘Colorism’ is defined as: prejudice or discrimination against individuals with a dark skin tone, typically among people of the same ethnic or racial group.
‘Passing’ (in the context of this book) is defined as: the ability of a person to be regarded as a member of an identity group or category, such as racial identity, ethnicity, caste, social class, sexual orientation, gender, religion, age or disability status, that is often different from their own.
I had never read a book with these two concepts portrayed so vividly.
It just fleshes out more of the complexities of the idea of race. It just made me wonder: what does it mean to be white? to be black? what is black culture? what is white culture?
Race is a social construct. People have differing melanin levels. How does one really classify themselves when our skin shades vary so much. Unfortunately there is historical significance to what race means. But that’s not how God intended it.
We are all part of the same race. We all share a common ancestor.
The apostle Paul taught the Greeks in Athens: “he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God…” (Acts 17:26)
It’s sad whenever we read in history of people discriminating and hating groups of people. It has happened in every generation and as long as sinful man lives, it will most likely continue, because at the heart of racism or prejudice of any kind, is sin.
It’s always tricky to talk about race in a way that acknowledges the realities of the past without perpetuating a concept that is divisive. As I was reflecting on these things in anticipation of writing this review I was listening to THIS podcast and appreciated their insights on differentiating between race, culture, and ethnicity and how ethnicity is important but it should never be our primary identity. I see today where many people have turned their race or ethnicity almost into this idol they worship, whether that’s white, black, Latino, Asian, etc.
When our primary identity is in Christ and who HE says we are, we are able to find unity and reconciliation in the blood of Christ. We are able to live as one family, sinners who have been rescued by our Savior and Creator who adopted us to new life, new creations living in peace and love by the power of the Spirit.
When I read a book like this I grieve the experiences of dark-skinned blacks who were treated egregiously simply because they looked different. I grieve the experiences of light-skinned blacks who had to make impossible choices that may protect them from some things but cause pain in other ways.
Sometimes it’s hard to know what to do with these feelings, especially in a world today where there is cultural tension surrounding race. I remember these helpful words from Isaac Adams in his book Talking About Race:
“We can rest in this truth: our job is not to completely eradicate the world of racism; it is to faithfully follow the One who will. And vengeance and perfect justice belong to him.”
Two Ways to Live
The theme I most noticed, though, was the idea of living split lives.
“She’d always known that it was possible to be two different people in one lifetime.”
We have twins splitting from their ‘conjoined’ existence into choosing their own path. We have Stella living as a white woman when she’s really black. We have Reese, previously known as Theresa, living as a man even though her biology reveals she is a woman. We have Barry, a man who gets two days a month to dress up in drag and be Bianca.
I actually thought it was interesting that Bennett decided to juxtapose the race-specific double life with the gender-specific double lives.
Some reviewers weren’t thrilled with the character of Reese because Reese’s significance in the story seemed more like checking the ‘diversity’ box without actually exploring the whole LGBTQ storyline. Others were uncomfortable with the comparison to Jude because it didn’t feel right to say they are similar.
In the story Jude, who has experienced the prejudice of her hometown, tells her ‘boyfriend’ Reese that she wishes she had lighter skin. Reese says she shouldn’t think that, that her skin is beautiful the way it is. Meanwhile Reese is saving up money to get breast removal surgery. Why is it wrong to want to change your skin color but not to want to change your gender? Especially when race is not coded into every cell of your body but gender is?
There are several comments throughout the book about ‘acting’, ‘lying', and ‘pretending.’ Barry says of being in drag: “It was fun because everyone knew that it was not real.” Reese thinks, “How real was a person if you could shed her in a thousand miles?”
Living our ‘true selves’ is a priority in the world today. But if we want to be our true selves, we need to know truth. It is important to know what is real.
I know I am in the minority when I say that I don’t ascribe to LGBTQ ideology. I know that puts me at risk for backlash. But in a book that sets these things next to one another, I can’t pass the opportunity to communicate that it is true: our bodies do matter and what we do with our bodies matter.
I love this quote from the excellent book, What God Says About Our Bodies by Sam Allberry:
“Your body––my body––is not just there, happening to exist. It means something to God. He knows it. He made it. He cares about it. And all that Christ has done in his death and resurrection is not in order for us one day to escape our body, but for him one day to redeem it.”
God created each one of us on purpose. When he made Adam he started with fashioning his body and then breathed life into him. The bodies he gave us were intended for us. That doesn’t mean we don’t face challenges in the bodies we have. We have various limitations and struggles with our bodies.
Even though our bodies are not ultimate, it’s popular to believe that our true selves have nothing to do with our bodies— just something deep inside us; thus, changing our bodies to ‘match’ our insides is the noble and right thing.
“Theologian Tom Wright puts it this way: The great controlling myth of our time has been the belief that within each one of us there is a real, inner, private “self,” long buried beneath layers of socialization and attempted cultural and religious control, and needing to be rediscovered if we are to live authentic lives.”[Allberry]
but
“‘who I really am’ can’t be considered without reference to my body.” [Allberry]
This book presents multiple ways where people live a split life: appearing one way but feeling different inside, wanting to be someone different, or trying to express on the outside what they feel on the inside but not quite feeling a unified self.
I think this is a really good theme to consider. When we live outside of our design we do feel that split, that something is not the way it’s supposed to be. We are not meant to live double lives.
Jesus said, “No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other.” (Matt 6:24)
I know Bennett was not presenting this case in the way she wrote the book, but we can still learn from these characters in their struggles. We should seek to live a unified life. The Bible tells of two ways to live: either Jesus is King of your life or he isn’t.
Paul wrote in his letter to the Corinthian church, “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.” (1 Cor 6:19-20)
What we do with our bodies or believe about our bodies reveals who our master is: our Creator who designed our bodies to be used a certain way? or our own desires? Do we do whatever feels right at any given moment? Or do we sacrifice what we want in order to follow God’s commands? We can’t have it both ways.
Allberry explains this verse in Corinthians this way:
“In any other context, hearing that we are not our own, that we have been bought with a price, would be devastating. It would indicate a lack of freedom, dignity, and worth. But when applied to Jesus, the opposite is the case. Belonging to him is the only way to true freedom. Nothing could be more dignifying. And nothing shows our worth more than Jesus shedding his own blood for us. To belong to him is the highest and greatest blessing we could ever hope for.”
True freedom can’t be found in altering our bodies. Whether that means changing our skin color or removing our private parts. Freedom is found in embracing Christ and his way.
Our cry should be like the psalm writer who says, “Teach me your way, Lord, that I may rely on your faithfulness; give me an undivided heart, that I may fear your name.” (Ps 86:11)
And so when I read this book, I also grieve for those who, like Barry or Reese, feel at odds with their bodies. It’s a struggle I don’t know, but I can imagine it’s really hard and lonely. I grieve that people like them have also experienced discrimination, hate, and harm.
Even if I have a different ideology than the LBTQ community, we are all image bearers of God and should be treated with compassion and dignity. Our worth is not tied to our skin color or our gender or any other characteristic of who we think we are. Our worth is inherent because we were all created by God.
When we live in rebellion to God’s design for us, we feel the strife and the discontinuity, but if we align ourselves with Christ, our identity is no longer in our skin color, our gender, our sexuality, our ethnicity, our feelings. Our identity is now: ‘redeemed’. Our hope is no longer in fixing our bodies to align with our feelings, it’s in knowing that perfect bodies await us when Jesus returns to take away our pain, discomfort, and dysphoria. We endure because life on earth is short and eternity is long.
One of the characters in the book “was always inventing her life.” We think it’s up to us to write our own stories and make something of ourselves. But I love what Rachel Jankovic says in her excellent book You Who?: Why You Matter and How to Deal with It:
“the more we try to build up an identity apart from God and apart from His Word, the less truly “us“ we become. It doesn’t matter how long or thoughtful or detailed the story you were writing is. If it is written by a character in the story rather than the Author of the story, it can only ever be tiny; it will always be minuscule by comparison. You cannot, as a character, out-write the Author of you.”
There are a lot of fiction books that explore what it means for characters to find ‘freedom’ from whatever is plaguing them. We write about that dilemma because that is our dilemma in real life. We all feel chained by something.
It’s the right thing to reflect on. Seek for answers. I don’t think The Vanishing Half will necessarily lead you into the path of truth, but I know God can show up anywhere for anyone. My hope and prayer is that all will find freedom from their chains!
Recommendation
This book wasn’t for me. And the primary reason is that it dragged and didn’t feel like it had any major conflict. The story was spread too thin across the four women and I didn’t feel invested in their relationships when their connections were so minimal and fleeting.
I also didn’t feel like there was much redemption in this story.
Combine all that with the annoying chronological whiplash, and it wasn’t one that’s going to stick with me.
However, I think this is one I’m not going to say ‘don’t read.’ I think a lot of people can enjoy this book. I think my review will probably tell you enough to know if it’s something you want to get into or not.
[Content Advisory: 7 f-words, 18 s-words, 2 b-words, and using the Lord’s name in vain quite a bit- probably half of the swearing came just from Kennedy’s character; some sexual content- including a few graphic but brief scenes; details about a girl’s story in becoming a man (Theresa/Reese); describes briefly a lynching]
“You can escape town, but you cannot escape blood. Somehow, the Vignes twins believed themselves capable of both.”
This book wasn’t really what I was expecting when I saw the title. I thought (because I didn’t read the summary and just knew the book was about twins) that one of a set of twins goes missing. They make it seem like that for about the first few sentences of the book but nope. The twins just skipped town.
So The Vanishing Half is not a thriller but a long drawn out look at twin sisters who move away from their hometown in search of a different life. They go their own ways, have daughters, and we see how their choices then in turn impact their daughters’ lives.
This book started out fine and I felt interested in how these sisters’ relationship was going to change and grow and how they would reconcile. But then it just felt like it was taking forever and then the sisters take a backseat as we spend a lot of time on the daughters. Every time you think you’re getting somewhere with one character, surprise! the next chapter is someone completely different.
When you read a thriller you kinda know where the story is going and when it’s about to be done. In this story, I just felt like I had no idea where it was going or when it was going to stop. And not in a mysterious way, just a… what are we even doing here? kind of way.
I agree with a lot of other reviewers that I would have preferred more focus on the sisters than the cousins and that they would have had more interaction and character development with each other. But we don’t really see them together until the last few pages and a few snippets here and there.
It did just feel like this book tried to do too much and so instead of doing one thing really well it did a lot of things but not so great.
The writing style was also pretty hard to follow at times. Lots of jumping around chronologically and adding backstories in the middle of present-day stories. For example, within a single paragraph she talks about what the character is doing, what the character is going to do in a year, and then backs up to a year prior to the present to share a little backstory. All in like 4-5 sentences! It’s just chronological whiplash and I don’t enjoy that style of writing.
There were also some poorly worded segues into new thoughts that the author wanted to include but apparently didn’t know how else to incorporate them into the story.
For example, one new paragraph started: “Here’s something she hadn’t thought about in forever:” And then she told a story about the past. It just didn’t feel creative or cogent.
Bennett would also start new sections or chapters without using names, only pronouns, so you had to figure out who this was about. But then she uses the name within a paragraph or two so it’s not like it was really supposed to be hidden, but now you have to go back and reread the ambiguous stuff once you got the name so you know what you were supposed to be getting from it all.
One other major disappointment: I liked Early’s character and that he was going to help Desiree find her sister, but he ended up being pretty inconsequential. He tried to find her, and then, he just couldn’t. Oh well.
Plus if Desiree’s husband really wanted to find her, he knew she was from Mallard. Even if he thought she would never go back, if you’ve looked everywhere else why wouldn’t you at least check? It would be super easy to pop on over to this super small town and see if she’s there. No bail bondsman required. But apparently checking the only other town she knows well was beyond him. Doesn’t make any sense.
Again, not super important to the unfolding of the plot since this wasn’t a thriller, but feels like a plot hole that was just ignored.
Popular Themes
The most talked about themes of this book are the ideas of race, colorism, and passing.
The twins are light-skinned blacks living a whole little town of similarly colored people who look down on dark-colored blacks.
When the twins leave town, one ends up marrying a really dark-skinned man and the other one ends up moving to California and passing as a white woman.
The twin who comes back, Desiree, is fleeing an abusive husband and returns to town with her dark-skinned daughter, Jude. They have to face the discrimination in town for all of Jude’s childhood. But we don’t get much of that because Jude’s part of the story jumps ahead to when she goes away to college.
The twin in California, Stella, had realized that she had more access to things and opportunities if people thought she was white. (A lot of this story takes place during the 60s and 70s.) There was segregation and discrimination against black people and so she saw a way to live the life she wanted. But it required her to ‘act white.’ She realizes that befriending black people would blow her cover so we see the cost of her lie in many ways. Her daughter, Kennedy, grows up in this privileged, wealthy environment without any knowledge of where her mother came from which has caused a big rift in their relationship.
‘Colorism’ is defined as: prejudice or discrimination against individuals with a dark skin tone, typically among people of the same ethnic or racial group.
‘Passing’ (in the context of this book) is defined as: the ability of a person to be regarded as a member of an identity group or category, such as racial identity, ethnicity, caste, social class, sexual orientation, gender, religion, age or disability status, that is often different from their own.
I had never read a book with these two concepts portrayed so vividly.
It just fleshes out more of the complexities of the idea of race. It just made me wonder: what does it mean to be white? to be black? what is black culture? what is white culture?
Race is a social construct. People have differing melanin levels. How does one really classify themselves when our skin shades vary so much. Unfortunately there is historical significance to what race means. But that’s not how God intended it.
We are all part of the same race. We all share a common ancestor.
The apostle Paul taught the Greeks in Athens: “he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God…” (Acts 17:26)
It’s sad whenever we read in history of people discriminating and hating groups of people. It has happened in every generation and as long as sinful man lives, it will most likely continue, because at the heart of racism or prejudice of any kind, is sin.
It’s always tricky to talk about race in a way that acknowledges the realities of the past without perpetuating a concept that is divisive. As I was reflecting on these things in anticipation of writing this review I was listening to THIS podcast and appreciated their insights on differentiating between race, culture, and ethnicity and how ethnicity is important but it should never be our primary identity. I see today where many people have turned their race or ethnicity almost into this idol they worship, whether that’s white, black, Latino, Asian, etc.
When our primary identity is in Christ and who HE says we are, we are able to find unity and reconciliation in the blood of Christ. We are able to live as one family, sinners who have been rescued by our Savior and Creator who adopted us to new life, new creations living in peace and love by the power of the Spirit.
When I read a book like this I grieve the experiences of dark-skinned blacks who were treated egregiously simply because they looked different. I grieve the experiences of light-skinned blacks who had to make impossible choices that may protect them from some things but cause pain in other ways.
Sometimes it’s hard to know what to do with these feelings, especially in a world today where there is cultural tension surrounding race. I remember these helpful words from Isaac Adams in his book Talking About Race:
“We can rest in this truth: our job is not to completely eradicate the world of racism; it is to faithfully follow the One who will. And vengeance and perfect justice belong to him.”
Two Ways to Live
The theme I most noticed, though, was the idea of living split lives.
“She’d always known that it was possible to be two different people in one lifetime.”
We have twins splitting from their ‘conjoined’ existence into choosing their own path. We have Stella living as a white woman when she’s really black. We have Reese, previously known as Theresa, living as a man even though her biology reveals she is a woman. We have Barry, a man who gets two days a month to dress up in drag and be Bianca.
I actually thought it was interesting that Bennett decided to juxtapose the race-specific double life with the gender-specific double lives.
Some reviewers weren’t thrilled with the character of Reese because Reese’s significance in the story seemed more like checking the ‘diversity’ box without actually exploring the whole LGBTQ storyline. Others were uncomfortable with the comparison to Jude because it didn’t feel right to say they are similar.
In the story Jude, who has experienced the prejudice of her hometown, tells her ‘boyfriend’ Reese that she wishes she had lighter skin. Reese says she shouldn’t think that, that her skin is beautiful the way it is. Meanwhile Reese is saving up money to get breast removal surgery. Why is it wrong to want to change your skin color but not to want to change your gender? Especially when race is not coded into every cell of your body but gender is?
There are several comments throughout the book about ‘acting’, ‘lying', and ‘pretending.’ Barry says of being in drag: “It was fun because everyone knew that it was not real.” Reese thinks, “How real was a person if you could shed her in a thousand miles?”
Living our ‘true selves’ is a priority in the world today. But if we want to be our true selves, we need to know truth. It is important to know what is real.
I know I am in the minority when I say that I don’t ascribe to LGBTQ ideology. I know that puts me at risk for backlash. But in a book that sets these things next to one another, I can’t pass the opportunity to communicate that it is true: our bodies do matter and what we do with our bodies matter.
I love this quote from the excellent book, What God Says About Our Bodies by Sam Allberry:
“Your body––my body––is not just there, happening to exist. It means something to God. He knows it. He made it. He cares about it. And all that Christ has done in his death and resurrection is not in order for us one day to escape our body, but for him one day to redeem it.”
God created each one of us on purpose. When he made Adam he started with fashioning his body and then breathed life into him. The bodies he gave us were intended for us. That doesn’t mean we don’t face challenges in the bodies we have. We have various limitations and struggles with our bodies.
Even though our bodies are not ultimate, it’s popular to believe that our true selves have nothing to do with our bodies— just something deep inside us; thus, changing our bodies to ‘match’ our insides is the noble and right thing.
“Theologian Tom Wright puts it this way: The great controlling myth of our time has been the belief that within each one of us there is a real, inner, private “self,” long buried beneath layers of socialization and attempted cultural and religious control, and needing to be rediscovered if we are to live authentic lives.”[Allberry]
but
“‘who I really am’ can’t be considered without reference to my body.” [Allberry]
This book presents multiple ways where people live a split life: appearing one way but feeling different inside, wanting to be someone different, or trying to express on the outside what they feel on the inside but not quite feeling a unified self.
I think this is a really good theme to consider. When we live outside of our design we do feel that split, that something is not the way it’s supposed to be. We are not meant to live double lives.
Jesus said, “No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other.” (Matt 6:24)
I know Bennett was not presenting this case in the way she wrote the book, but we can still learn from these characters in their struggles. We should seek to live a unified life. The Bible tells of two ways to live: either Jesus is King of your life or he isn’t.
Paul wrote in his letter to the Corinthian church, “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.” (1 Cor 6:19-20)
What we do with our bodies or believe about our bodies reveals who our master is: our Creator who designed our bodies to be used a certain way? or our own desires? Do we do whatever feels right at any given moment? Or do we sacrifice what we want in order to follow God’s commands? We can’t have it both ways.
Allberry explains this verse in Corinthians this way:
“In any other context, hearing that we are not our own, that we have been bought with a price, would be devastating. It would indicate a lack of freedom, dignity, and worth. But when applied to Jesus, the opposite is the case. Belonging to him is the only way to true freedom. Nothing could be more dignifying. And nothing shows our worth more than Jesus shedding his own blood for us. To belong to him is the highest and greatest blessing we could ever hope for.”
True freedom can’t be found in altering our bodies. Whether that means changing our skin color or removing our private parts. Freedom is found in embracing Christ and his way.
Our cry should be like the psalm writer who says, “Teach me your way, Lord, that I may rely on your faithfulness; give me an undivided heart, that I may fear your name.” (Ps 86:11)
And so when I read this book, I also grieve for those who, like Barry or Reese, feel at odds with their bodies. It’s a struggle I don’t know, but I can imagine it’s really hard and lonely. I grieve that people like them have also experienced discrimination, hate, and harm.
Even if I have a different ideology than the LBTQ community, we are all image bearers of God and should be treated with compassion and dignity. Our worth is not tied to our skin color or our gender or any other characteristic of who we think we are. Our worth is inherent because we were all created by God.
When we live in rebellion to God’s design for us, we feel the strife and the discontinuity, but if we align ourselves with Christ, our identity is no longer in our skin color, our gender, our sexuality, our ethnicity, our feelings. Our identity is now: ‘redeemed’. Our hope is no longer in fixing our bodies to align with our feelings, it’s in knowing that perfect bodies await us when Jesus returns to take away our pain, discomfort, and dysphoria. We endure because life on earth is short and eternity is long.
One of the characters in the book “was always inventing her life.” We think it’s up to us to write our own stories and make something of ourselves. But I love what Rachel Jankovic says in her excellent book You Who?: Why You Matter and How to Deal with It:
“the more we try to build up an identity apart from God and apart from His Word, the less truly “us“ we become. It doesn’t matter how long or thoughtful or detailed the story you were writing is. If it is written by a character in the story rather than the Author of the story, it can only ever be tiny; it will always be minuscule by comparison. You cannot, as a character, out-write the Author of you.”
There are a lot of fiction books that explore what it means for characters to find ‘freedom’ from whatever is plaguing them. We write about that dilemma because that is our dilemma in real life. We all feel chained by something.
It’s the right thing to reflect on. Seek for answers. I don’t think The Vanishing Half will necessarily lead you into the path of truth, but I know God can show up anywhere for anyone. My hope and prayer is that all will find freedom from their chains!
Recommendation
This book wasn’t for me. And the primary reason is that it dragged and didn’t feel like it had any major conflict. The story was spread too thin across the four women and I didn’t feel invested in their relationships when their connections were so minimal and fleeting.
I also didn’t feel like there was much redemption in this story.
Combine all that with the annoying chronological whiplash, and it wasn’t one that’s going to stick with me.
However, I think this is one I’m not going to say ‘don’t read.’ I think a lot of people can enjoy this book. I think my review will probably tell you enough to know if it’s something you want to get into or not.
[Content Advisory: 7 f-words, 18 s-words, 2 b-words, and using the Lord’s name in vain quite a bit- probably half of the swearing came just from Kennedy’s character; some sexual content- including a few graphic but brief scenes; details about a girl’s story in becoming a man (Theresa/Reese); describes briefly a lynching]
The Tea Girl of Hummingbird Lane by Lisa See
Did not finish book. Stopped at 9%.
Did not finish book. Stopped at 9%.
I rarely leave a book unfinished, but I had to do that with this one.
This isn’t how I wanted my first book and review of the year to go.
But I read 34 pages of this book and I was upset. Disturbed.
So I asked a Facebook reading community for insight on whether or not I should continue based on the concerns I had. Turns out a few people agreed with me, but most of the people loved this book and author and encouraged me to continue, even saying it was one of their favorite books though didn’t really say why or give any concrete reasons for finishing.
Ultimately, I decided not to continue reading it.
Here’s where I’m at:
The Tea Girl of Hummingbird starts out in a mountain village somewhere in China, the home of the Akha tribe.
We learn about a variety of their cultural practices including spirit worship, the superiority of males over females, and all the superstitions surrounding these elements. For example, they encourage husbands to climb trees a lot because they think that will help their pregnant wives have a boy.
Within the first 34 pages the main character, Li-yan, is helping her mother, the village midwife, deliver her sister-in-law’s baby. She is having a hard labor. They call the village shaman who says that an outside spirit was insulted when Deh-ja made a mistake in her ancestral offerings. So they make her— during labor while she is in severe pain and bleeding— get up and sweep the room with a broom to sweep away the “malevolence.”
She eventually delivers a baby boy. Great news! But then they realize she has another baby inside her. Twins. Bad news. The worst news. Here’s what they say:
“Twins. Human rejects… Twins are the absolute worst taboo in our culture, for only animals, demons, and spirits give birth to litters.”
“These are our rules… Human rejects need to be sent to the Great Lake of boiling blood. This is how we protect the village from idiots, the malformed, or those so so small they’ll only prolong their own deaths. it is us— midwives— who keep our people pure and in alignment with the goodness of nature, because if human rejects are allowed to do the intercourse, over time an entire village might end up inhabited by only them.”
And so they murder the twin babies. And then they banish the parents of the human rejects and burn their house down.
Just. What in the actual heck??
Yes, I’m a mother of twins. Twins who came early and were very tiny and are now four and thriving. That is part of my disgust with these cultural practices. But killing ‘undesired’ humans across the board is wrong. Period. Regardless of circumstance or culture.
And bottom line is: I didn’t feel good about reading a book about it.
I asked the online community if this was going to be a book that tried to portray the Akha culture as beautiful and valid because I knew I wouldn’t be able to handle that. I didn’t get a lot of clear answers on this. At least one person claimed that the characters acknowledge the wrongness.
Li-yan eventually has a baby of her own (out of wedlock) that would also require murder, but she decides to rebel against her culture and give her baby up for adoption. The story then (based on the summary) follows the daughter and the mother’s life and their yearning for each other.
Honestly, I don’t know a lot about the book. Maybe what I read is such a small snippet and not the main focus of the book at all.
I don’t know what kind of redemption is found or not found in this book. It could be that I should have given this book a full chance.
But I have too many books to read to spend my time reading one that makes me upset. I largely read because I ENJOY reading. This book did not bring me joy.
I do like reading a variety of genres and historical fiction is one of them. I have read some hard books that talk about hard things. I fully understand that history is not neat and tidy. I do think it’s important to read about things or people that are different from me.
However.
Murdering babies is not just something ‘different’ than me and my beliefs. It’s evil. The worship of spirits is evil. (Which is why I avoid horror books and books with devils and witches and stories that glorify their existence)
I decided that it would be wiser for me to forgo the rest of the book than to endure more of the same thing.
The summary says the mother and daughter both look for meaning in studying the tea that shaped their heritage. If that is the only hope this book provides, I’m still not seeing anything worth sticking around for. I can’t imagine there’s much deep and solid meaning for broken people in a farming process.
Further, it’s not really just reading the history of something that happened but is no longer a thing. Wikipedia says this culture ‘stopped’ this practice only 20 years ago and now puts the babies up for adoption instead. It also says that people from Laos claim the practice isn’t completely eradicated.
I will pray for the Akha people and for all the babies growing in the wombs of the Akha women that they will see life, but I cannot read this book.
I’m not saying this specific book does this (because I didn’t read the whole thing) but I often feel like there is this idea held by lots of people that all cultures are equally valid. That we can’t critique another culture. Who are we to say what other people do or believe is wrong?
‘Fascinating’ and ‘interesting’ can be words used to describe the way the Akha tribe builds their homes or cooks their food or how they make tea. They cannot be used to describe their other cultural practices that are evil.
Culture has to be able to be critiqued. My own American culture has to be critiqued. There is no culture that should be immune from the questions- Is this right? Is this good? Is this true? I hope that people write about the American and European culture of killing babies via the method of abortion as abhorrent. Essentially abortion is the same thing the Akha tribe is doing and we should be equally disgusted by it because life is something to be treasured. Always.
If there is ever a book that tries to portray the evil elements of culture as purely ‘interesting’ or ‘worth learning about’ and then moving on with our day, I will gladly never read it.
This may or may not be that book, but I didn’t want to take the chance.
Is this decision perfectly consistent with my reading choices in the past? Probably not. I don’t know. I think it’s impossible to really read consistently across time. I can only do my best every time I pick a book to read.
I chose this book originally because it fit my reading challenge prompt of ‘a book set in a different culture than your own’ and it definitely qualified, but there are plenty of other cultures that I would rather read about and I think that’s okay.
Recommendation
I don’t really recommend this book based on what I read.
There is clearly many people who feel differently about this book and that may describe you. If you feel you can handle reading it, you are now going into it more informed and you can make the best decision for you. Maybe you can separate out the evil from the good and focus on other elements.
But let my review be the permission you need, if you feel similarly to me, that NOT reading this book is okay too. It does not mean you don’t care about the Akha people or other cultures in general. It does not mean you choose to be ignorant about hard things. It just means you won’t enjoy the book and have chosen something different.
[Content Advisory: as of 34 pages there is spirit worship and the killing of infants]
This isn’t how I wanted my first book and review of the year to go.
But I read 34 pages of this book and I was upset. Disturbed.
So I asked a Facebook reading community for insight on whether or not I should continue based on the concerns I had. Turns out a few people agreed with me, but most of the people loved this book and author and encouraged me to continue, even saying it was one of their favorite books though didn’t really say why or give any concrete reasons for finishing.
Ultimately, I decided not to continue reading it.
Here’s where I’m at:
The Tea Girl of Hummingbird starts out in a mountain village somewhere in China, the home of the Akha tribe.
We learn about a variety of their cultural practices including spirit worship, the superiority of males over females, and all the superstitions surrounding these elements. For example, they encourage husbands to climb trees a lot because they think that will help their pregnant wives have a boy.
Within the first 34 pages the main character, Li-yan, is helping her mother, the village midwife, deliver her sister-in-law’s baby. She is having a hard labor. They call the village shaman who says that an outside spirit was insulted when Deh-ja made a mistake in her ancestral offerings. So they make her— during labor while she is in severe pain and bleeding— get up and sweep the room with a broom to sweep away the “malevolence.”
She eventually delivers a baby boy. Great news! But then they realize she has another baby inside her. Twins. Bad news. The worst news. Here’s what they say:
“Twins. Human rejects… Twins are the absolute worst taboo in our culture, for only animals, demons, and spirits give birth to litters.”
“These are our rules… Human rejects need to be sent to the Great Lake of boiling blood. This is how we protect the village from idiots, the malformed, or those so so small they’ll only prolong their own deaths. it is us— midwives— who keep our people pure and in alignment with the goodness of nature, because if human rejects are allowed to do the intercourse, over time an entire village might end up inhabited by only them.”
And so they murder the twin babies. And then they banish the parents of the human rejects and burn their house down.
Just. What in the actual heck??
Yes, I’m a mother of twins. Twins who came early and were very tiny and are now four and thriving. That is part of my disgust with these cultural practices. But killing ‘undesired’ humans across the board is wrong. Period. Regardless of circumstance or culture.
And bottom line is: I didn’t feel good about reading a book about it.
I asked the online community if this was going to be a book that tried to portray the Akha culture as beautiful and valid because I knew I wouldn’t be able to handle that. I didn’t get a lot of clear answers on this. At least one person claimed that the characters acknowledge the wrongness.
Li-yan eventually has a baby of her own (out of wedlock) that would also require murder, but she decides to rebel against her culture and give her baby up for adoption. The story then (based on the summary) follows the daughter and the mother’s life and their yearning for each other.
Honestly, I don’t know a lot about the book. Maybe what I read is such a small snippet and not the main focus of the book at all.
I don’t know what kind of redemption is found or not found in this book. It could be that I should have given this book a full chance.
But I have too many books to read to spend my time reading one that makes me upset. I largely read because I ENJOY reading. This book did not bring me joy.
I do like reading a variety of genres and historical fiction is one of them. I have read some hard books that talk about hard things. I fully understand that history is not neat and tidy. I do think it’s important to read about things or people that are different from me.
However.
Murdering babies is not just something ‘different’ than me and my beliefs. It’s evil. The worship of spirits is evil. (Which is why I avoid horror books and books with devils and witches and stories that glorify their existence)
I decided that it would be wiser for me to forgo the rest of the book than to endure more of the same thing.
The summary says the mother and daughter both look for meaning in studying the tea that shaped their heritage. If that is the only hope this book provides, I’m still not seeing anything worth sticking around for. I can’t imagine there’s much deep and solid meaning for broken people in a farming process.
Further, it’s not really just reading the history of something that happened but is no longer a thing. Wikipedia says this culture ‘stopped’ this practice only 20 years ago and now puts the babies up for adoption instead. It also says that people from Laos claim the practice isn’t completely eradicated.
I will pray for the Akha people and for all the babies growing in the wombs of the Akha women that they will see life, but I cannot read this book.
I’m not saying this specific book does this (because I didn’t read the whole thing) but I often feel like there is this idea held by lots of people that all cultures are equally valid. That we can’t critique another culture. Who are we to say what other people do or believe is wrong?
‘Fascinating’ and ‘interesting’ can be words used to describe the way the Akha tribe builds their homes or cooks their food or how they make tea. They cannot be used to describe their other cultural practices that are evil.
Culture has to be able to be critiqued. My own American culture has to be critiqued. There is no culture that should be immune from the questions- Is this right? Is this good? Is this true? I hope that people write about the American and European culture of killing babies via the method of abortion as abhorrent. Essentially abortion is the same thing the Akha tribe is doing and we should be equally disgusted by it because life is something to be treasured. Always.
If there is ever a book that tries to portray the evil elements of culture as purely ‘interesting’ or ‘worth learning about’ and then moving on with our day, I will gladly never read it.
This may or may not be that book, but I didn’t want to take the chance.
Is this decision perfectly consistent with my reading choices in the past? Probably not. I don’t know. I think it’s impossible to really read consistently across time. I can only do my best every time I pick a book to read.
I chose this book originally because it fit my reading challenge prompt of ‘a book set in a different culture than your own’ and it definitely qualified, but there are plenty of other cultures that I would rather read about and I think that’s okay.
Recommendation
I don’t really recommend this book based on what I read.
There is clearly many people who feel differently about this book and that may describe you. If you feel you can handle reading it, you are now going into it more informed and you can make the best decision for you. Maybe you can separate out the evil from the good and focus on other elements.
But let my review be the permission you need, if you feel similarly to me, that NOT reading this book is okay too. It does not mean you don’t care about the Akha people or other cultures in general. It does not mean you choose to be ignorant about hard things. It just means you won’t enjoy the book and have chosen something different.
[Content Advisory: as of 34 pages there is spirit worship and the killing of infants]
Everyone This Christmas Has a Secret by Benjamin Stevenson
funny
lighthearted
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
“A woman covered in blood who doesn’t remember how it got on her. And a man decapitated… by a piece of paper.”
Earlier this year I read Stevenson’s book Everyone in My Family Has Killed Someone and really enjoyed the ‘Golden Age’ fair play whodunnit mystery. It was clever and funny and I enjoyed his writing.
This Christmas mystery is the third book in the series— I’ll have to go back and read the one on the train next year— and was the same good experience.
It definitely had the Christmas vibes. Stevenson even cleverly organized the clues like an advent calendar.
“If you start on December first and take a chapter a day, you’ll have it all solved by Christmas Eve.”
I didn’t want to keep myself to only one chapter a day, but I could see how that could be a fun way to read it as well.
“Tinsel-draped as the corpses may be, this is still a fair play mystery. You’ll find no hidden clues or unreliable narrators here. My job is to relay to you everything you need to reach the same ‘lightbulb’ moment as I did.”
In this book we have the same first-person narrator— Ernest— who has at this time now solved a couple mysteries and has made a little name for himself.
He is brought into this case by his ex-wife Erin who has been accused of murdering her partner Lyle. After all, she was caught, literally, red-handed. With his blood. And no recollection of doing anything.
“She wouldn’t be the first member of my family to have killed someone.”
Lyle ran a theater run by recovering addicts whose headliner right now is a magician. This is the backdrop to Ernest’s investigation when a second murder occurs.
“There are quite a few differences between an Australian Christmas and the stereotypical Northern Hemisphere fare seen in most books and movies. For one thing, we don’t get snow down under. What we do get, in my specific experience, is more murders.”
There are 23 clues and I think I figured out most of it by just one of those clues and fairly early on in the book. But obviously I didn’t know if my hunch was correct until the end. And there were some aspects of the solving that I missed so I’m glad it was more complex than I thought.
And I was questioning this claim that Ernest makes at the beginning until I realized… he really did do this.
“And of course, by the end of these things, the detective has to learn the true meaning of the word Christmas.”
Lastly, a quote that is fitting for New Year’s as well:
“Confessions are like morning gym sessions: you have a finite window to commit to one and it gets harder to summon the courage once you miss it.”
More lastly than that, here are couple Australian terms I learned:
punters: gamblers; one might argue that being a football punter in America is a gamble in itself
scream blue murder: not to be confused with ‘screaming bloody murder’ though it means the exact same thing, but in this case the hypothetical murder isn’t bloody, it’s more just sad I guess
Recommendation
There’s not a lot to cover in a book like this. It’s pretty straightforward, clean cut, and enjoyable. Nothing that shocks the pants off ya, but definitely not a snooze fest either.
And if a mystery can incorporate Comic Sans into the plot, it’s basically genius.
I would definitely recommend this unless you refuse to read books without a sadistic psychopath and blood everywhere. Although there is blood… I mean a man was DECAPITATED!
Just an enjoyable read and I’ll say it again: I enjoyed it. You probably will too. Especially at Christmas time.
If you are looking for another Christmas thriller also try Christmas Presents by Lisa Unger.
[Content Advisory: 1 f-word, 7 s-words; no sexual content]
Earlier this year I read Stevenson’s book Everyone in My Family Has Killed Someone and really enjoyed the ‘Golden Age’ fair play whodunnit mystery. It was clever and funny and I enjoyed his writing.
This Christmas mystery is the third book in the series— I’ll have to go back and read the one on the train next year— and was the same good experience.
It definitely had the Christmas vibes. Stevenson even cleverly organized the clues like an advent calendar.
“If you start on December first and take a chapter a day, you’ll have it all solved by Christmas Eve.”
I didn’t want to keep myself to only one chapter a day, but I could see how that could be a fun way to read it as well.
“Tinsel-draped as the corpses may be, this is still a fair play mystery. You’ll find no hidden clues or unreliable narrators here. My job is to relay to you everything you need to reach the same ‘lightbulb’ moment as I did.”
In this book we have the same first-person narrator— Ernest— who has at this time now solved a couple mysteries and has made a little name for himself.
He is brought into this case by his ex-wife Erin who has been accused of murdering her partner Lyle. After all, she was caught, literally, red-handed. With his blood. And no recollection of doing anything.
“She wouldn’t be the first member of my family to have killed someone.”
Lyle ran a theater run by recovering addicts whose headliner right now is a magician. This is the backdrop to Ernest’s investigation when a second murder occurs.
“There are quite a few differences between an Australian Christmas and the stereotypical Northern Hemisphere fare seen in most books and movies. For one thing, we don’t get snow down under. What we do get, in my specific experience, is more murders.”
There are 23 clues and I think I figured out most of it by just one of those clues and fairly early on in the book. But obviously I didn’t know if my hunch was correct until the end. And there were some aspects of the solving that I missed so I’m glad it was more complex than I thought.
And I was questioning this claim that Ernest makes at the beginning until I realized… he really did do this.
“And of course, by the end of these things, the detective has to learn the true meaning of the word Christmas.”
Lastly, a quote that is fitting for New Year’s as well:
“Confessions are like morning gym sessions: you have a finite window to commit to one and it gets harder to summon the courage once you miss it.”
More lastly than that, here are couple Australian terms I learned:
punters: gamblers; one might argue that being a football punter in America is a gamble in itself
scream blue murder: not to be confused with ‘screaming bloody murder’ though it means the exact same thing, but in this case the hypothetical murder isn’t bloody, it’s more just sad I guess
Recommendation
There’s not a lot to cover in a book like this. It’s pretty straightforward, clean cut, and enjoyable. Nothing that shocks the pants off ya, but definitely not a snooze fest either.
And if a mystery can incorporate Comic Sans into the plot, it’s basically genius.
I would definitely recommend this unless you refuse to read books without a sadistic psychopath and blood everywhere. Although there is blood… I mean a man was DECAPITATED!
Just an enjoyable read and I’ll say it again: I enjoyed it. You probably will too. Especially at Christmas time.
If you are looking for another Christmas thriller also try Christmas Presents by Lisa Unger.
[Content Advisory: 1 f-word, 7 s-words; no sexual content]
Recursion by Blake Crouch
adventurous
dark
emotional
sad
medium-paced
- Strong character development? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
“What do you cling to, moment to moment, if memories can simply change? What, then, is real? And if the answer is nothing, where does that leave us?”
This book has an intense start.
The first thing is a woman jumping off a building because she has what has been deemed ‘False Memory Syndrome.’ The memories she has of her little boy are said to be false memories; he doesn’t exist. And she can’t handle living this life without him.
Then the main female character, Helena, has a mom with Alzheimer’s and is losing her memories.
Then the main male character, Barry, is reminiscing with his ex-wife about their daughter who would have been 26 that day if she hadn’t died in a car accident as a teenager.
Welcome to Recursion. It’ll give you some feelings.
I really enjoyed Crouch’s book Dark Matter and felt like he created an accessible science fiction novel with a compelling plot. Recursion felt a lot harder to wrap my mind around.
I like reflecting on the concept of memory and how it shapes us, how important it is to who we are.
That is what’s so sad about thinking about Alzheimer’s patients losing their reality and losing the memory of everything that made up their lives. That is what’s so sad about thinking of the jumping woman who had memories of a little boy that didn’t exist. We have loved ones and we can’t bear the thought of losing them, whether physically or in memories.
While Dark Matter explored the multi-verse, Recursion explores the idea of déjà vu and a changeable timeline.
What if déjà vu is actually a remnant memory from a previous timeline, “timelines that never happened but did, casting their shadows upon reality”?
In this story Helena is a neuroscientist and has spent her life working towards a way for Alzheimer’s patients to be able to re-access their memories. Obviously, her mother is her inspiration.
But what she ends up creating, with the unlimited resources of an ‘investor,’ is a chair that allows someone to access an old memory and then ‘enter’ that memory at which point everyone in the world is ‘transported’ back in time with no memory of their future life. When the ‘new’ timeline catches up with the original date of their ‘recursion’ they suddenly have memories of that other ‘dead’ timeline that no longer exists. By going back in time using the chair, the future is altered. For everyone.
At first it’s only a few people who have ‘False Memory Syndrome’ and it’s small scale little pockets of people. Other people’s lives are largely unaffected. But the more often and the more drastically the chair is used, the more widespread the déjà vu and the traumatic the experience when the timelines are remembered.
Time travel books are always a little trippy to follow the trajectory and think about the domino effect of changing the past. What made this one seem a bit even more out there is just that one person using the chair throws the entire world back. I just had a hard time with that connection. It got even more complex as other organizations made their own chair and multiple groups were using it.
Obviously, things get out of hand pretty fast. It becomes the classic ‘how do we undo this technology that we thought would be helpful and meaningful but immediately got weaponized and is now hurting people?’
Then the story becomes Helena and Barry reliving the same life over and over trying to find a way to destroy everyone’s memory of the chair and memories of the ‘false timelines’ because it’s deteriorating everyone’s mental health.
“If memory is unreliable, if the past and present can simply change without warning, then fact and truth will cease to exist. How do we live in a world like that?”
There is a pretty hopeless feeling in this book. Somewhat similar to Dark Matter, I guess, where you just feel like everything is ruined and the main characters will never get back to where they need to be. You definitely become invested in the outcome. Plus an ending with just nuclear warfare and fallout is pretty depressing and horrific so I’m glad Crouch gave us a better ending.
However, I didn’t like the trajectory of Barry’s character. He begins with this deep connection and attachment to his daughter and his life when she was alive. But as the book progresses it’s more about his relationship with Helena and making sure they’re together in each of the timelines. It felt like Barry was more than willing to ditch his other timeline and memories to be with Helena which I didn’t like as much.
At one point in the book they are partnering with a DARPA organization to use the chair to reverse recent military blunders or civilian attacks. Their justification is this:
“We aren’t talking about swapping out good memories for bad or randomly altering reality. We’re here for one purpose— the undoing of human misery.”
That’s the thing about technology isn’t it? New technology arises in an attempt to fix something or make life better or easier. We want to remove any misery when we can.
But I liked this quote from the book:
“Life with a cheat code isn’t life. Our existence isn’t something to be engineered or optimized for the avoidance of pain… That’s what it is to be human— the beauty and the pain, each meaningless without the other.”
I believe the brokenness and pain of the world is not how it’s supposed to be. God created the world and it was good. But then Adam and Eve rebelled against God which created a chasm between humanity and the perfect life. The curse and fallout of their rebellion resulted in heartache, turmoil, toil, and pain.
But the ultimate arc of the story of humanity is God’s plan to redeem us. The pain in our world is what reminds us that we need God. It reminds us of the perfect life that is promised to those who follow Christ. He brings beauty from ashes.
I know Recursion is fiction and I know it could never become reality. I am comforted by Tony Reinke’s book God, Technology, and the Christian Life because in a world with books and movies that can instill fear in us towards any technology, it reminds us that as much as we want to play God, we are limited by the true God. Reinke says,
“Man’s increasing ambition and power don’t threaten God; they threaten man himself, because the more power they are able to concentrate, the more harm they will be able to do to themselves and the world.”
We see that at the Tower of Babel. God prevented the technology they tried to create and dispersed the people, confusing their language, and protecting them from the technology that would have harmed them.
As a people I think the core of this story is our story. We are often so preoccupied and obsessed with curating the perfect life or eliminating any discomfort or displeasure. Life is meant to be enjoyed so any form of pain stands in the way of that joy.
But what if the pain deepens the joy because it draws you closer to your Creator who is waiting to offer you a peace beyond understanding. A peace that wouldn’t make sense if you never knew pain. A relief that wouldn’t reverberate for years without first a sense of endurance.
No technology will be a cheat code for life. An engineered and optimized life would be an empty one.
Our memories often bring us pain, but it also reminds us of how far we’ve come.
And truly, we are more than our memories. We have to be. We don’t lose our personhood if we lose our memory. How sweet for those who live in confusion to know that the path of life in Christ leads to a restoration to a memory more vivid and complete than we could ever imagine. The loss of memory is not the end.
The characters talk about how evolution created these boundaries on our perception of reality and how time is an illusion. If we could just step outside of these limits, we would see reality for what it is. To some degree, I think they’re right. Time is a construct. God exists outside of time and someday we will too. A day is like a thousand years in heaven.
But I think it’s a little crazy to think that somehow evolution created time and perception of time. They really think evolution is the most powerful thing to create and destroy matter and affect abstract things like consciousness and morality and all that. Can’t explain something? Just say evolution created it over millions of years. Sorry but that doesn’t actually make any sense.
I’m just reflecting on the idea of time as a created thing. If God created us in the context of time, time was purposed. Without the constraint of time, we would never have to wait for anything. And I think waiting is a really important part of God’s design for us as human beings in how we view the world, ourselves, and God.
From the very beginning, God gave us the rhythm of passing time (Genesis). It reminds us of an order of operations. A designed timing. Not a random, haphazard timeless existence. Jesus even operated within an ongoing flow of time, waiting for the right moments to exercise his power.
The construct of time is also juxtaposed against the concept of eternity, which is what lies ahead for us. Knowing our time on earth is short in light of eternity, it influences how we live our lives and how we treat those within our lives. Time provides us with purpose.
The science fiction concept of time travel can be fun to explore and imagine, but if we let ourselves get stuck there wishing, we miss out on the significance of the reality of time and how we should use it.
If you love thinking about technology and its possibilities I would definitely encourage you to read Reinke’s book God, Technology, and the Christian Life. He is also intrigued by technological advancements and offers a great balanced look at how we should view and interact with new technologies.
I understand Blake Crouch did not set out to write a science fiction book that incorporated a faith or ‘God’ aspect; I can generally enjoy books for what they are; but, I can’t help but reflect on the concepts of his book in light of our actual reality and what that means for me today.
Here are two more quotes from Reinke that I really liked and feel are worth reflecting as we read Recursion:
“Human innovation satisfies human comforts but starves human hearts. Sinners are always trying to manufacture a new God-replacement.”
“Tech is a divine gift to test our stewardship.”
Recommendation
I liked Dark Matter better than Recursion because I felt like I could wrap my mind around that one a little more, but Recursion was still a good book! Definitely a book I would recommend if you like science fiction or time travel novels.
This book was compelling and quickly invests you in the story’s outcome.
If you really don’t like time travel, I think I would still recommend Dark Matter but may say to skip this one.
Also skip this one if you are triggered by nuclear warfare.
Overall Crouch is a good and creative writer and I think I will continue to read his stuff!
[Content Advisory: 29 f-words 14 s-words, 1 b-word; no sexual content]
This book has an intense start.
The first thing is a woman jumping off a building because she has what has been deemed ‘False Memory Syndrome.’ The memories she has of her little boy are said to be false memories; he doesn’t exist. And she can’t handle living this life without him.
Then the main female character, Helena, has a mom with Alzheimer’s and is losing her memories.
Then the main male character, Barry, is reminiscing with his ex-wife about their daughter who would have been 26 that day if she hadn’t died in a car accident as a teenager.
Welcome to Recursion. It’ll give you some feelings.
I really enjoyed Crouch’s book Dark Matter and felt like he created an accessible science fiction novel with a compelling plot. Recursion felt a lot harder to wrap my mind around.
I like reflecting on the concept of memory and how it shapes us, how important it is to who we are.
That is what’s so sad about thinking about Alzheimer’s patients losing their reality and losing the memory of everything that made up their lives. That is what’s so sad about thinking of the jumping woman who had memories of a little boy that didn’t exist. We have loved ones and we can’t bear the thought of losing them, whether physically or in memories.
While Dark Matter explored the multi-verse, Recursion explores the idea of déjà vu and a changeable timeline.
What if déjà vu is actually a remnant memory from a previous timeline, “timelines that never happened but did, casting their shadows upon reality”?
In this story Helena is a neuroscientist and has spent her life working towards a way for Alzheimer’s patients to be able to re-access their memories. Obviously, her mother is her inspiration.
But what she ends up creating, with the unlimited resources of an ‘investor,’ is a chair that allows someone to access an old memory and then ‘enter’ that memory at which point everyone in the world is ‘transported’ back in time with no memory of their future life. When the ‘new’ timeline catches up with the original date of their ‘recursion’ they suddenly have memories of that other ‘dead’ timeline that no longer exists. By going back in time using the chair, the future is altered. For everyone.
At first it’s only a few people who have ‘False Memory Syndrome’ and it’s small scale little pockets of people. Other people’s lives are largely unaffected. But the more often and the more drastically the chair is used, the more widespread the déjà vu and the traumatic the experience when the timelines are remembered.
Time travel books are always a little trippy to follow the trajectory and think about the domino effect of changing the past. What made this one seem a bit even more out there is just that one person using the chair throws the entire world back. I just had a hard time with that connection. It got even more complex as other organizations made their own chair and multiple groups were using it.
Obviously, things get out of hand pretty fast. It becomes the classic ‘how do we undo this technology that we thought would be helpful and meaningful but immediately got weaponized and is now hurting people?’
Then the story becomes Helena and Barry reliving the same life over and over trying to find a way to destroy everyone’s memory of the chair and memories of the ‘false timelines’ because it’s deteriorating everyone’s mental health.
“If memory is unreliable, if the past and present can simply change without warning, then fact and truth will cease to exist. How do we live in a world like that?”
There is a pretty hopeless feeling in this book. Somewhat similar to Dark Matter, I guess, where you just feel like everything is ruined and the main characters will never get back to where they need to be. You definitely become invested in the outcome. Plus an ending with just nuclear warfare and fallout is pretty depressing and horrific so I’m glad Crouch gave us a better ending.
However, I didn’t like the trajectory of Barry’s character. He begins with this deep connection and attachment to his daughter and his life when she was alive. But as the book progresses it’s more about his relationship with Helena and making sure they’re together in each of the timelines. It felt like Barry was more than willing to ditch his other timeline and memories to be with Helena which I didn’t like as much.
At one point in the book they are partnering with a DARPA organization to use the chair to reverse recent military blunders or civilian attacks. Their justification is this:
“We aren’t talking about swapping out good memories for bad or randomly altering reality. We’re here for one purpose— the undoing of human misery.”
That’s the thing about technology isn’t it? New technology arises in an attempt to fix something or make life better or easier. We want to remove any misery when we can.
But I liked this quote from the book:
“Life with a cheat code isn’t life. Our existence isn’t something to be engineered or optimized for the avoidance of pain… That’s what it is to be human— the beauty and the pain, each meaningless without the other.”
I believe the brokenness and pain of the world is not how it’s supposed to be. God created the world and it was good. But then Adam and Eve rebelled against God which created a chasm between humanity and the perfect life. The curse and fallout of their rebellion resulted in heartache, turmoil, toil, and pain.
But the ultimate arc of the story of humanity is God’s plan to redeem us. The pain in our world is what reminds us that we need God. It reminds us of the perfect life that is promised to those who follow Christ. He brings beauty from ashes.
I know Recursion is fiction and I know it could never become reality. I am comforted by Tony Reinke’s book God, Technology, and the Christian Life because in a world with books and movies that can instill fear in us towards any technology, it reminds us that as much as we want to play God, we are limited by the true God. Reinke says,
“Man’s increasing ambition and power don’t threaten God; they threaten man himself, because the more power they are able to concentrate, the more harm they will be able to do to themselves and the world.”
We see that at the Tower of Babel. God prevented the technology they tried to create and dispersed the people, confusing their language, and protecting them from the technology that would have harmed them.
As a people I think the core of this story is our story. We are often so preoccupied and obsessed with curating the perfect life or eliminating any discomfort or displeasure. Life is meant to be enjoyed so any form of pain stands in the way of that joy.
But what if the pain deepens the joy because it draws you closer to your Creator who is waiting to offer you a peace beyond understanding. A peace that wouldn’t make sense if you never knew pain. A relief that wouldn’t reverberate for years without first a sense of endurance.
No technology will be a cheat code for life. An engineered and optimized life would be an empty one.
Our memories often bring us pain, but it also reminds us of how far we’ve come.
And truly, we are more than our memories. We have to be. We don’t lose our personhood if we lose our memory. How sweet for those who live in confusion to know that the path of life in Christ leads to a restoration to a memory more vivid and complete than we could ever imagine. The loss of memory is not the end.
The characters talk about how evolution created these boundaries on our perception of reality and how time is an illusion. If we could just step outside of these limits, we would see reality for what it is. To some degree, I think they’re right. Time is a construct. God exists outside of time and someday we will too. A day is like a thousand years in heaven.
But I think it’s a little crazy to think that somehow evolution created time and perception of time. They really think evolution is the most powerful thing to create and destroy matter and affect abstract things like consciousness and morality and all that. Can’t explain something? Just say evolution created it over millions of years. Sorry but that doesn’t actually make any sense.
I’m just reflecting on the idea of time as a created thing. If God created us in the context of time, time was purposed. Without the constraint of time, we would never have to wait for anything. And I think waiting is a really important part of God’s design for us as human beings in how we view the world, ourselves, and God.
From the very beginning, God gave us the rhythm of passing time (Genesis). It reminds us of an order of operations. A designed timing. Not a random, haphazard timeless existence. Jesus even operated within an ongoing flow of time, waiting for the right moments to exercise his power.
The construct of time is also juxtaposed against the concept of eternity, which is what lies ahead for us. Knowing our time on earth is short in light of eternity, it influences how we live our lives and how we treat those within our lives. Time provides us with purpose.
The science fiction concept of time travel can be fun to explore and imagine, but if we let ourselves get stuck there wishing, we miss out on the significance of the reality of time and how we should use it.
If you love thinking about technology and its possibilities I would definitely encourage you to read Reinke’s book God, Technology, and the Christian Life. He is also intrigued by technological advancements and offers a great balanced look at how we should view and interact with new technologies.
I understand Blake Crouch did not set out to write a science fiction book that incorporated a faith or ‘God’ aspect; I can generally enjoy books for what they are; but, I can’t help but reflect on the concepts of his book in light of our actual reality and what that means for me today.
Here are two more quotes from Reinke that I really liked and feel are worth reflecting as we read Recursion:
“Human innovation satisfies human comforts but starves human hearts. Sinners are always trying to manufacture a new God-replacement.”
“Tech is a divine gift to test our stewardship.”
Recommendation
I liked Dark Matter better than Recursion because I felt like I could wrap my mind around that one a little more, but Recursion was still a good book! Definitely a book I would recommend if you like science fiction or time travel novels.
This book was compelling and quickly invests you in the story’s outcome.
If you really don’t like time travel, I think I would still recommend Dark Matter but may say to skip this one.
Also skip this one if you are triggered by nuclear warfare.
Overall Crouch is a good and creative writer and I think I will continue to read his stuff!
[Content Advisory: 29 f-words 14 s-words, 1 b-word; no sexual content]
Content Warnings
Moderate: Cursing
Crying in H Mart by Michelle Zauner
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
slow-paced
3.0
“Within 5 years, I lost both my aunt and my mother to cancer. When I go to H Mart I’m searching for memories. I’m collecting the evidence that the Korean half of my identity didn’t die when they did. H Mart is the bridge that guides me away from the memories that haunt me… it reminds me of who they were before, beautiful and full of life.”
This isn’t a new release anymore, but I remember when it was. And I remember how popular and hyped it got. Here I am, years later finally reading it for myself. And I gotta say… I’m a little disappointed.
It’s not a bad book, but it’s not really one I could see myself talking about and saying- ‘You gotta read this!’
When I read memoirs it’s always a bit hard to nail down what’s ‘wrong’ with the book because what I’ve just read is someone sharing their own story and personal experiences. It’s not necessarily an author trying to craft a masterful plot or create unforgettable characters. It’s just a real person sharing their real life. And how am I to judge that?
I was reflecting on what makes a good memoir to me because it feels like so many memoirs I read are a bit ‘meh.’
Granted, most of them are celebrity memoirs which makes sense because everyone knows who they are and are interested in who they ‘actually’ are, [and I’m realizing at this moment that that doesn’t really BEAR well for me hoping my eventual memoir becomes a hit if I don’t even read memoirs from ‘nobodies’] but I think it’s often the ‘don’t meet your heroes’ kinda thing.
To give you a baseline: I liked Broken (in the best possible way), Funny in Farsi, The Office BFFs, Talking as Fast as I Can, but I didn’t like The Glass Castle, Start Without Me, Scrappy Little Nobody, or Yes, Please.
Crying in H Mart reminded me a little bit of Simu Liu’s book We Were Dreamers because he also had a complicated relationship with his parents and had the struggle of being an Asian American.
I think what I like most about memoirs is when they’re relatable, funny, exciting or interesting, or when the author shares how their struggles or hardships led them to the Lord or helped them experience God in a new way (which would be true of Ben Higgins’ memoir).
A lot of memoirs I read end up being ‘meh’ because it’s more about just learning about a different culture than my own or learning a famous person’s background. In those cases it’s more informative than engaging. Good to learn, but not something that’s really going to stick with me. Or it’s just a little too eye-opening to read about their bad choices and drug use and sometimes raw and honest can be an unpleasant reading experience. Like Michelle could have left out the parts about the gray curls of skin at the bath house…
In the case of Crying in H Mart, it was the ‘meh’ kind of memoir. Though I did have a Samantha American Girl doll and the Princess Diana Beanie Baby that I think will still be worth millions someday, there wasn’t a lot to relate to. I haven’t experienced the loss of a parent; I don’t experience the struggles of being biracial and not knowing where I belong; I haven’t had a troublesome relationship with my mom; and though my mom had breast cancer, she didn’t have to undergo chemotherapy; I’m also not trying to make in the music (or any other kind of) industry.
Of course, memoirs don’t always have to be relatable. It’s good to read about people, cultures, and experiences that are different from me. It was interesting to learn about the Korean culture and food. It’s interesting to read about her grief journey with her mom and heartbreaking to hear the raw harshness of what cancer can mean.
I don’t know. It just didn’t really feel like the book was written for me, but maybe more for herself.
She is very honest about her complicated relationship with her mom and the ways her mom let her down or damaged her self-esteem.
“Hers was a tougher than tough love. It was brutal, industrial-strength.”
“I spent my childhood divided between two impulses, engaging in the intrinsic tomboyish whims thtat led to her reprimands and clinging to my mother, desperate to please her.”
So then when she’s going to lose her mom it causes her to think about their relationship and see the things she loved about her mom or to understand why her mom was the way she was and did the things she did.
I’m guessing writing this book was a therapeutic exercise in processing her grief. It felt more exploratory and disjointed than a complete account. The ending especially didn’t give me a great sense for where she’s at in her grief process and how she views her mom. It was about her music and the last section about karaoke seemed like it was meant to be profound but didn’t do much for me. It was a weird, abrupt ending I’m not sure what to do with.
I don’t have a concrete takeaway from the book in the sense of grieving and growing. I’m not sure I could explain exactly how this loss changed Michelle other than being sad and missing her mom and appreciating that her mom did everything for her out of love for her.
Because Michelle is an atheist, there was also no tie-in to how to view life and the after life, no real hope after death or reflection on the purpose of life. She does hold on to some reincarnation pieces in honor of her mom, but I can’t imagine coming back to life as a bug that could so easily be squished is truly that comforting. It’s always a little sad for me to read a story about real loss when they don’t have the hope of Jesus and the promise of new life, the redemption of our broken bodies and yearning souls.
Others have mentioned it started as an essay in the paper and got turned into this and I’m thinking an essay may have made more sense because what was in the book didn’t feel like a lot to go on.
The writing style also made it hard to engage. It jumped around a lot chronologically and I had to figure out if this was before or after the cancer diagnosis which affects how you understand that stories she’s sharing.
The cover shows chopsticks and noodles and H Mart is the place she would shop for Korean food so I assumed there would be a lot of food talk. I was right. And of course you can’t please everybody. I, personally, thought there was maybe too much of the food descriptions. Another reviewer thought the food stuff was ‘few and far between’ (not sure how that could be…), and another reviewer was upset that the author thought she had to ‘explain’ all the Korean dishes to us white folk (I did appreciate the explanations or I would have skipped those parts entirely). So I understand- hard to please everyone.
That being said, if you ARE a foodie then I think you’ll enjoy the book and will probably want to go find your closest H Mart yourself. Some of the descriptions appealed to me and I thought I’d like to give it a try, but most of the time I was struggling to imagine it tasting good. I’m a bit of a picky eater and not super brave about trying new things. Like kimchi? Fermented cabbage? That sounds scary.
While I did think the food descriptions felt like too much of the book, I did reflect on the role of food in our lives and relationships. Korean food was Michelle’s connection to her mother.
“Food was the unspoken language between us, that it had come to symbolize our return to each other, our bonding, our common ground.”
I think about the family dinner table and the foundational role it has for familial relationships. The kitchen and cooking or baking together. I think about how God created us to need food. He designed a connection point for people to connect and fellowship together. It makes sense that this builds bridges between people.
It’s a good reminder to make our family meals something meaningful. If we have to eat, let’s make it worth our while. Let’s do something with that time.
Another thing I thought was interesting (since this book was informative for me) was the value placed on appearance by her mother. She was telling us all about her mother’s serums and creams and clothing and her obsession with beauty.
Zauner shared this statistic: “South Korea has the highest rate of cosmetic surgery. 1 in 3 women in their 20s have undergone some type of procedure.”
That seems like an astronomical statistic. I know America is also obsessed with beauty so I was curious how America compared. This isn’t an exact statistical comparison but Pew Research stated that 4% of Americans have said they’ve had some sort of cosmetic surgery. That number seems low and I wonder if people lied— not sure how they gathered this data.
But I think it’s important to think about as we read Michelle’s story. Her mother’s preoccupation with appearance definitely influenced their relationship and how Michelle viewed herself. Our daughters (and sons) are watching us and they pick up on what’s important. We’re sending them a message when we show them what’s most important to us. Looks are fleeting. Beauty the way the world defines it is fleeting and largely unattainable. I hope the legacy I leave for my kids is not about how much time I spent in the mirror or money I spent on the newest creams to stay looking young.
Lastly, I have to reflect on this quote from her book:
“My mother’s lack of purpose seemed more and more an oddity, suspect, even anti-feminist. That my care played such a principal role in her life was a vocation I naively condemned, rebuffing the intensive, invisible labor as the errand work of a housewife who’d neglected to develop a passion or a practical skill set. It wasn’t until years later that I began to understand what it meant to make a home and just how much I had taken mine for granted.”
I’m glad she realized the error in her thinking, but the sentiment she voiced is one that is common in at least America and as a stay-at-home mom, it’s one I’m always up against. To be a mom and spend your time caring for your children is seen as a giving up on your dreams and even a giving up on your ‘true identity.’ To be a mom is to ‘lose yourself.’
And I think that’s a straight up lie.
Being a mom is a sacrifice. We give up a lot of ourselves— our time, our energy, our money— to do what’s best for our children. That doesn’t make me less of a person or less of a woman. It doesn’t mean I lack skills or ambition. And to care for our children is far more meaningful than mere ‘errand work.’
Apparently in the world today, a woman is more of a woman when they look and act more like a man. It’s so backwards to think that a mom caring for her child is anti-feminist. Like what? That’s literally what our bodies were designed to do. That’s about as feminist as you can get. Well, if your definition of feminism is that you believe in the value of women instead of a definition that means women should be like men.
It seems like people today think that in order to view women as being ‘more than just someone who has babies’ we have to lower the role of a stay-at-home mom as something less than. It is true that women can do more than just have babies and care for babies, but let’s not say that as if having and caring for babies is level 1 on the spectrum of success, purpose, and meaning and it’s only up from there.
So I’m glad that Michelle realized that she was naive to think of what her mom did for her was neglecting the ‘real work’ to be found in the world. I hope my kids see what I’ve given them is an ultimate act of love and sacrifice and that I was still my awesome self while doing it. Caring for their eternal souls has been an honor and a privilege and I hope I get to continue doing it for many more years to come!
Recommendation
This is not a book I say definitely read and it’s not a book I say definitely don’t read.
I didn’t hate reading it, but I didn’t love it. It’s not one that will really stick with me or stand out among all the books I read in a year.
However, it’s clear this book has made an impact on a lot of people, so don’t let me keep it from you if it strikes a chord with you. I would venture that people who particularly enjoy ethnic food or could relate to the loss of a parent or being biracial would like this book more than I did.
I’ve also realized what makes a memoir a five star read for me is harder to find than I thought.
[Content Advisory: 16 s-words, 11 f-words; not really any sexual content; there’s a nonsexual bath house scene and mention of sex but nothing described]
This isn’t a new release anymore, but I remember when it was. And I remember how popular and hyped it got. Here I am, years later finally reading it for myself. And I gotta say… I’m a little disappointed.
It’s not a bad book, but it’s not really one I could see myself talking about and saying- ‘You gotta read this!’
When I read memoirs it’s always a bit hard to nail down what’s ‘wrong’ with the book because what I’ve just read is someone sharing their own story and personal experiences. It’s not necessarily an author trying to craft a masterful plot or create unforgettable characters. It’s just a real person sharing their real life. And how am I to judge that?
I was reflecting on what makes a good memoir to me because it feels like so many memoirs I read are a bit ‘meh.’
Granted, most of them are celebrity memoirs which makes sense because everyone knows who they are and are interested in who they ‘actually’ are, [and I’m realizing at this moment that that doesn’t really BEAR well for me hoping my eventual memoir becomes a hit if I don’t even read memoirs from ‘nobodies’] but I think it’s often the ‘don’t meet your heroes’ kinda thing.
To give you a baseline: I liked Broken (in the best possible way), Funny in Farsi, The Office BFFs, Talking as Fast as I Can, but I didn’t like The Glass Castle, Start Without Me, Scrappy Little Nobody, or Yes, Please.
Crying in H Mart reminded me a little bit of Simu Liu’s book We Were Dreamers because he also had a complicated relationship with his parents and had the struggle of being an Asian American.
I think what I like most about memoirs is when they’re relatable, funny, exciting or interesting, or when the author shares how their struggles or hardships led them to the Lord or helped them experience God in a new way (which would be true of Ben Higgins’ memoir).
A lot of memoirs I read end up being ‘meh’ because it’s more about just learning about a different culture than my own or learning a famous person’s background. In those cases it’s more informative than engaging. Good to learn, but not something that’s really going to stick with me. Or it’s just a little too eye-opening to read about their bad choices and drug use and sometimes raw and honest can be an unpleasant reading experience. Like Michelle could have left out the parts about the gray curls of skin at the bath house…
In the case of Crying in H Mart, it was the ‘meh’ kind of memoir. Though I did have a Samantha American Girl doll and the Princess Diana Beanie Baby that I think will still be worth millions someday, there wasn’t a lot to relate to. I haven’t experienced the loss of a parent; I don’t experience the struggles of being biracial and not knowing where I belong; I haven’t had a troublesome relationship with my mom; and though my mom had breast cancer, she didn’t have to undergo chemotherapy; I’m also not trying to make in the music (or any other kind of) industry.
Of course, memoirs don’t always have to be relatable. It’s good to read about people, cultures, and experiences that are different from me. It was interesting to learn about the Korean culture and food. It’s interesting to read about her grief journey with her mom and heartbreaking to hear the raw harshness of what cancer can mean.
I don’t know. It just didn’t really feel like the book was written for me, but maybe more for herself.
She is very honest about her complicated relationship with her mom and the ways her mom let her down or damaged her self-esteem.
“Hers was a tougher than tough love. It was brutal, industrial-strength.”
“I spent my childhood divided between two impulses, engaging in the intrinsic tomboyish whims thtat led to her reprimands and clinging to my mother, desperate to please her.”
So then when she’s going to lose her mom it causes her to think about their relationship and see the things she loved about her mom or to understand why her mom was the way she was and did the things she did.
I’m guessing writing this book was a therapeutic exercise in processing her grief. It felt more exploratory and disjointed than a complete account. The ending especially didn’t give me a great sense for where she’s at in her grief process and how she views her mom. It was about her music and the last section about karaoke seemed like it was meant to be profound but didn’t do much for me. It was a weird, abrupt ending I’m not sure what to do with.
I don’t have a concrete takeaway from the book in the sense of grieving and growing. I’m not sure I could explain exactly how this loss changed Michelle other than being sad and missing her mom and appreciating that her mom did everything for her out of love for her.
Because Michelle is an atheist, there was also no tie-in to how to view life and the after life, no real hope after death or reflection on the purpose of life. She does hold on to some reincarnation pieces in honor of her mom, but I can’t imagine coming back to life as a bug that could so easily be squished is truly that comforting. It’s always a little sad for me to read a story about real loss when they don’t have the hope of Jesus and the promise of new life, the redemption of our broken bodies and yearning souls.
Others have mentioned it started as an essay in the paper and got turned into this and I’m thinking an essay may have made more sense because what was in the book didn’t feel like a lot to go on.
The writing style also made it hard to engage. It jumped around a lot chronologically and I had to figure out if this was before or after the cancer diagnosis which affects how you understand that stories she’s sharing.
The cover shows chopsticks and noodles and H Mart is the place she would shop for Korean food so I assumed there would be a lot of food talk. I was right. And of course you can’t please everybody. I, personally, thought there was maybe too much of the food descriptions. Another reviewer thought the food stuff was ‘few and far between’ (not sure how that could be…), and another reviewer was upset that the author thought she had to ‘explain’ all the Korean dishes to us white folk (I did appreciate the explanations or I would have skipped those parts entirely). So I understand- hard to please everyone.
That being said, if you ARE a foodie then I think you’ll enjoy the book and will probably want to go find your closest H Mart yourself. Some of the descriptions appealed to me and I thought I’d like to give it a try, but most of the time I was struggling to imagine it tasting good. I’m a bit of a picky eater and not super brave about trying new things. Like kimchi? Fermented cabbage? That sounds scary.
While I did think the food descriptions felt like too much of the book, I did reflect on the role of food in our lives and relationships. Korean food was Michelle’s connection to her mother.
“Food was the unspoken language between us, that it had come to symbolize our return to each other, our bonding, our common ground.”
I think about the family dinner table and the foundational role it has for familial relationships. The kitchen and cooking or baking together. I think about how God created us to need food. He designed a connection point for people to connect and fellowship together. It makes sense that this builds bridges between people.
It’s a good reminder to make our family meals something meaningful. If we have to eat, let’s make it worth our while. Let’s do something with that time.
Another thing I thought was interesting (since this book was informative for me) was the value placed on appearance by her mother. She was telling us all about her mother’s serums and creams and clothing and her obsession with beauty.
Zauner shared this statistic: “South Korea has the highest rate of cosmetic surgery. 1 in 3 women in their 20s have undergone some type of procedure.”
That seems like an astronomical statistic. I know America is also obsessed with beauty so I was curious how America compared. This isn’t an exact statistical comparison but Pew Research stated that 4% of Americans have said they’ve had some sort of cosmetic surgery. That number seems low and I wonder if people lied— not sure how they gathered this data.
But I think it’s important to think about as we read Michelle’s story. Her mother’s preoccupation with appearance definitely influenced their relationship and how Michelle viewed herself. Our daughters (and sons) are watching us and they pick up on what’s important. We’re sending them a message when we show them what’s most important to us. Looks are fleeting. Beauty the way the world defines it is fleeting and largely unattainable. I hope the legacy I leave for my kids is not about how much time I spent in the mirror or money I spent on the newest creams to stay looking young.
Lastly, I have to reflect on this quote from her book:
“My mother’s lack of purpose seemed more and more an oddity, suspect, even anti-feminist. That my care played such a principal role in her life was a vocation I naively condemned, rebuffing the intensive, invisible labor as the errand work of a housewife who’d neglected to develop a passion or a practical skill set. It wasn’t until years later that I began to understand what it meant to make a home and just how much I had taken mine for granted.”
I’m glad she realized the error in her thinking, but the sentiment she voiced is one that is common in at least America and as a stay-at-home mom, it’s one I’m always up against. To be a mom and spend your time caring for your children is seen as a giving up on your dreams and even a giving up on your ‘true identity.’ To be a mom is to ‘lose yourself.’
And I think that’s a straight up lie.
Being a mom is a sacrifice. We give up a lot of ourselves— our time, our energy, our money— to do what’s best for our children. That doesn’t make me less of a person or less of a woman. It doesn’t mean I lack skills or ambition. And to care for our children is far more meaningful than mere ‘errand work.’
Apparently in the world today, a woman is more of a woman when they look and act more like a man. It’s so backwards to think that a mom caring for her child is anti-feminist. Like what? That’s literally what our bodies were designed to do. That’s about as feminist as you can get. Well, if your definition of feminism is that you believe in the value of women instead of a definition that means women should be like men.
It seems like people today think that in order to view women as being ‘more than just someone who has babies’ we have to lower the role of a stay-at-home mom as something less than. It is true that women can do more than just have babies and care for babies, but let’s not say that as if having and caring for babies is level 1 on the spectrum of success, purpose, and meaning and it’s only up from there.
So I’m glad that Michelle realized that she was naive to think of what her mom did for her was neglecting the ‘real work’ to be found in the world. I hope my kids see what I’ve given them is an ultimate act of love and sacrifice and that I was still my awesome self while doing it. Caring for their eternal souls has been an honor and a privilege and I hope I get to continue doing it for many more years to come!
Recommendation
This is not a book I say definitely read and it’s not a book I say definitely don’t read.
I didn’t hate reading it, but I didn’t love it. It’s not one that will really stick with me or stand out among all the books I read in a year.
However, it’s clear this book has made an impact on a lot of people, so don’t let me keep it from you if it strikes a chord with you. I would venture that people who particularly enjoy ethnic food or could relate to the loss of a parent or being biracial would like this book more than I did.
I’ve also realized what makes a memoir a five star read for me is harder to find than I thought.
[Content Advisory: 16 s-words, 11 f-words; not really any sexual content; there’s a nonsexual bath house scene and mention of sex but nothing described]
Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions by Gregory Koukl
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
fast-paced
5.0
“If we disqualify legitimate discussion, we compromise our ability to know the truth, and error can thrive without restraint.”
This is an excellent and very practical book that I think every Christ follower should read because this book is about finding out the truth in any discussion. Even some people who claim Christ may not be able to say why they do so this book is not only for how to talk to others but helps us ask questions about our own beliefs to determine if what we believe is based on good reasons and sound rationale.
Some have expressed dislike for this book because of the cover making it seem like talking about our beliefs is a game to win. Some have felt like this book is just manipulation and replaces compassion for other people.
After reading this book, I disagree with those assessments. Koukl makes it very clear that the way we communicate with people is really important because people are image bearers of God. Our goal is not to make people look bad or disrespect them. We talk to them about truth because what they believe about God matters and we do it in a respectful way because who they are is significant.
“Tactics are not manipulative tricks or slick ruses. They are not clever ploys to embarrass other people and force them to submit to your point of view. They are not meant to belittle or humiliate those who disagree so you can gain notches in your spiritual belt.”
He even says at the outset that his goal in talking with people is not to convert them to Christianity. He simply wants to “put a stone in their shoe” and give them something to think about.
There is nothing unbiblical or unloving about having discussions about truth. Paul lays out his arguments for his convictions throughout his letters. He provides reasons and logic for readers to follow to understand his points.
“Rationality is one of the tools God has given us to acquire knowledge.”
Koukl has written this book because we are not all Paul. We don’t always know how to explain our beliefs or how to talk about them with people. We get flustered and don’t know what to say. Perhaps the other person becomes hostile or denigrates our character and we don’t know how to respond. Maybe they completely change the subject and don’t acknowledge the points we are making and we don’t know how to get the conversation back to the facts.
We worry about not knowing what to do or say so we just decide not to talk about our convictions. After all, we don’t want to force our beliefs on other people. Let’s just keep the peace and keep it to ourselves.
But that’s not obeying God’s commandment to make disciples of all people. That’s not working in the fields of the Lord’s harvest.
If we should be talking about Christ with others, we might as well know how to do it well!
What I love about this book is how practical and helpful it is.
Even though I’ve grown up in the church and read a lot of apologetics books, I don’t feel confident about talking with people about them a lot of times. Or I start to think that every conversation about God has to end in sharing the ‘Romans Road’ or having them ‘pray the prayer.’ And that doesn’t feel natural so I chicken out about even saying anything.
What Koukl describes in this book is doable. It’s real. And for the most part, it’s natural. Of course, we can tweak wording and things to fit how we communicate; it’s not a script we have to memorize. But it’s all things that makes sense to me.
Reading it was a bit of an ‘aha’ moment of— ‘Oh! That’s a great way to answer that’ or “That’s an easy way to respond to that objection’ or ‘That’s how I can handle that difficult type of conversation!’
I like this distinction Koukl makes:
“Cleverness without truth is manipulation.”
Knowing how to navigate a conversation is not manipulation if the point of the conversation is to determine truth. And if others try to turn the tables and use these tactics on us, it’s okay; we should have reasons for the things we believe and we shouldn’t be attacking or name-calling. If someone is truly manipulating, they wouldn’t want anyone else to use their own tactics against them, but here that isn’t the case.
We should be ready to give reasons for the hope that we have. (1 Pt 3:15)
I won’t go through all the tactics because it makes more sense as he explains them in his book then a book review really can, but the main gist of his tactics revolves around listening and asking questions.
He tells us to be a student of their beliefs.
“The person who makes a claim has the burden of proof.”
If someone makes a claim, it’s not on us to prove them wrong. We ask them questions to understand why they believe what they believe. They have to defend their beliefs. And a lot of times they can’t.
“An opinion is just a point of view. An argument, by contrast, is a point of view supported by reasons. Skeptics often give the first but not the second.”
I think this is very true. There have been numerous times where someone says something that sounds like a canned headline. Something everyone says but doesn’t really know what it means or where the logic of their statement actually takes them.
“We trot out our pet slogans whether secular ones or Christian ones— letting our catchphrases do the work that careful, thoughtful conversation should be doing instead.”
So most of his tactics involves asking ‘What do you mean by that?’ or ‘How did you come to that conclusion?’
This isn’t an exhaustive apologetics book that will give you all the answers— he assumes you already know why you believe in Christ and his teachings— but he does lay out some of the conversations he has on specific and common objections.
Here’s a few of the things he brings up- (it affirmed to me that he knows what he’s talking about because I think I’ve heard every single one of these multiple times but never with any actual argument for them)
- God used evolution to design the world.
- God can’t exist if there’s all this evil in the world.
- There’s no way to know anything about religion.
- You’re intolerant if you tell other people what to believe.
- The Bible was written by flawed human beings so it must be flawed.
- Science disproves miracles.
- You shouldn’t force your beliefs on other people.
- There is no objective morality. (He gives a series of questions to ask that really reveals that even if people make this claim they don’t actually live or think like it)
- I’m personally against abortion but I don’t believe in forcing my pro-life belief on other people.
- That’s just your interpretation.
- Religion is the source of evil in the world and more wars have been fought in the name of God than any other. (He provides a lot of facts to disprove this widely believed myth)
- The Council of Nicea determined which books should be in the Bible
- The Bible has been changed and translated differently for political reasons.
- Jesus never said anything about homosexuality.
As Koukl encourages, you don’t have to go out there and change everyone’s minds. You just have to be willing and ready to ask some questions and get to the heart of the claims people make and find out if they’ve really thought about what is true.
“It is always a step in the right direction when we help others to think more carefully. If nothing else, it gives them tools to assess the bigger questions that eventually come up.”
It doesn’t matter how fervently we believe it or how many other people believe the same things that we do. What matters is: what is true? what is reality?
I may not believe my house is on fire, but if it is in reality, that’s a big problem. So help people find out where the fire is.
Reality has a way of revealing itself. Faulty logic and arguments will fall like a roof with no posts. Sound arguments will stand under its own merits.
I liked when Koukl explained how faith in Christ is not an unreasonable faith, or as some would say ‘Faith is believing things we cannot know.’
Faith is not wishful thinking. We all live with faith in something— that our chair will hold us up, that a bus route will go according to the map, etc. There are good reasons for believing these things.
Faith in Christ is reasonable. There are many many reasons to believe what the Bible says is true and that what Jesus claimed was true.
“Faith and knowledge are not opposites in Scripture. The opposite of faith is not fact, but unbelief. The opposite of knowledge is not faith but ignorance.”
If having reasons for what we believe made our faith less, then our faith would be the strongest when there are absolutely no good reasons for believing it. That’s not how faith works. That wouldn’t make any sense.
There are many people out there putting out TikToks and YouTube videos with snappy lines that make it sound like they’re ‘taking down’ Christianity, and many people are ill-equipped to spot the lie or see the inconsistencies or poke holes in the theories.
They begin to feel defeated and wonder if what they’ve believed really is unreasonable. I actually saw that firsthand at a Christian college— people encountering questions they’d never had to answer before and then giving up on all of it instead of doing the work of finding the answers— because there are answers.
Koukl’s tactics help us understand our own faith but also how to identify when other rhetoric is falling short.
One of the sections towards the end of the book talks about changing our lingo and I thought that was helpful. There definitely is a Christian lingo and I can tell that people are turned off by certain terminology or just stop listening to you because they think they've heard it all before.
Koukl's suggestions for words to change make sense to me and I'll probably try to do it. Some of them are using 'my spiritual convictions' instead of 'my faith'. Instead of saying 'the Bible says' to try to quote from Jesus of Nazareth when you can or from the ancient Hebrew prophets (OT) or from the people Jesus trained to follow after him (NT) or from primary source documents (Gospels). Instead of saying 'sin' he calls it 'moral crimes' against God. Instead of 'unbelievers' he refers to 'those who believe differently.'
For the most part I tracked with everything he was saying, however, there were some dialogues he relayed that I wish I could have stepped in to play devil's advocate with him. Things I wanted to question him further on to see how he would respond or deal with certain objections that I thought of while reading.
I will say, that I can see what some reviewers are saying about the limit to these tactics.
For one, in an online forum, these tactics would be really hard to employ properly, but I think we can all agree that trying to talk about matters like this online is usually a dicey and non-advisable situation regardless; talking face-to-face is always best.
Two, I think a majority of his conversations are with strangers or acquaintances or in debates and formal arrangements. As readers we should use wisdom when applying these tactics and be aware of who we are talking to. If we are conversing with long-term relationships or people dealing with big life hardship, etc, the way we go about it will be different.
Some of the tactics are structured in ways that make sense in short one-off conversations and some should be applied differently if we’re talking about these things throughout a whole series of conversations.
I don’t think either of these things take away from the book. I think for the scope and purpose in what he was writing he accomplished something really good and helpful. As with all books and advice we take it in and apply it with wisdom.
The principles of this book are sound and even if you don’t like the title ‘Tactics’ it is what he was providing. Just because tactics can have a bad connotation doesn’t make the word or the book bad. Tactics are simply strategies.
We employ tactics all the time in other areas of life, why not be prepared when it comes to talking about the most important thing in our lives? I’d love a strategy for that. Speaking about truth with excellence seems like a God-honoring endeavor.
Recommendation
I would definitely recommend this book. Even if you don’t plan to go out and start a million conversations, it’s a great way to train your brain to understand belief systems and those who hold them. It will strengthen your own faith. It will give you confidence about a lot of buzzword claims that get thrown around a lot.
I do think it’s not the only book to be read about this. Especially if you don’t feel like you can give arguments for the things you believe, I would encourage you to read some other apologetics books that go through all the arguments in depth. Click the link below to get you started.
I would also recommend visiting www.str.org (Stand to Reason) which is a website Koukl is on that is full of articles and videos talking about all the things in the book. Or look up some of Koukl’s debates to see these tactics in action. He practices what he preaches and writes this book from a lot of experience. I think the website will be a nice resource to visit when a question comes up that I’m not sure how to respond to. I also think I will revisit this book often.
Discussion about truth is always important and this book will help you do it!
This is an excellent and very practical book that I think every Christ follower should read because this book is about finding out the truth in any discussion. Even some people who claim Christ may not be able to say why they do so this book is not only for how to talk to others but helps us ask questions about our own beliefs to determine if what we believe is based on good reasons and sound rationale.
Some have expressed dislike for this book because of the cover making it seem like talking about our beliefs is a game to win. Some have felt like this book is just manipulation and replaces compassion for other people.
After reading this book, I disagree with those assessments. Koukl makes it very clear that the way we communicate with people is really important because people are image bearers of God. Our goal is not to make people look bad or disrespect them. We talk to them about truth because what they believe about God matters and we do it in a respectful way because who they are is significant.
“Tactics are not manipulative tricks or slick ruses. They are not clever ploys to embarrass other people and force them to submit to your point of view. They are not meant to belittle or humiliate those who disagree so you can gain notches in your spiritual belt.”
He even says at the outset that his goal in talking with people is not to convert them to Christianity. He simply wants to “put a stone in their shoe” and give them something to think about.
There is nothing unbiblical or unloving about having discussions about truth. Paul lays out his arguments for his convictions throughout his letters. He provides reasons and logic for readers to follow to understand his points.
“Rationality is one of the tools God has given us to acquire knowledge.”
Koukl has written this book because we are not all Paul. We don’t always know how to explain our beliefs or how to talk about them with people. We get flustered and don’t know what to say. Perhaps the other person becomes hostile or denigrates our character and we don’t know how to respond. Maybe they completely change the subject and don’t acknowledge the points we are making and we don’t know how to get the conversation back to the facts.
We worry about not knowing what to do or say so we just decide not to talk about our convictions. After all, we don’t want to force our beliefs on other people. Let’s just keep the peace and keep it to ourselves.
But that’s not obeying God’s commandment to make disciples of all people. That’s not working in the fields of the Lord’s harvest.
If we should be talking about Christ with others, we might as well know how to do it well!
What I love about this book is how practical and helpful it is.
Even though I’ve grown up in the church and read a lot of apologetics books, I don’t feel confident about talking with people about them a lot of times. Or I start to think that every conversation about God has to end in sharing the ‘Romans Road’ or having them ‘pray the prayer.’ And that doesn’t feel natural so I chicken out about even saying anything.
What Koukl describes in this book is doable. It’s real. And for the most part, it’s natural. Of course, we can tweak wording and things to fit how we communicate; it’s not a script we have to memorize. But it’s all things that makes sense to me.
Reading it was a bit of an ‘aha’ moment of— ‘Oh! That’s a great way to answer that’ or “That’s an easy way to respond to that objection’ or ‘That’s how I can handle that difficult type of conversation!’
I like this distinction Koukl makes:
“Cleverness without truth is manipulation.”
Knowing how to navigate a conversation is not manipulation if the point of the conversation is to determine truth. And if others try to turn the tables and use these tactics on us, it’s okay; we should have reasons for the things we believe and we shouldn’t be attacking or name-calling. If someone is truly manipulating, they wouldn’t want anyone else to use their own tactics against them, but here that isn’t the case.
We should be ready to give reasons for the hope that we have. (1 Pt 3:15)
I won’t go through all the tactics because it makes more sense as he explains them in his book then a book review really can, but the main gist of his tactics revolves around listening and asking questions.
He tells us to be a student of their beliefs.
“The person who makes a claim has the burden of proof.”
If someone makes a claim, it’s not on us to prove them wrong. We ask them questions to understand why they believe what they believe. They have to defend their beliefs. And a lot of times they can’t.
“An opinion is just a point of view. An argument, by contrast, is a point of view supported by reasons. Skeptics often give the first but not the second.”
I think this is very true. There have been numerous times where someone says something that sounds like a canned headline. Something everyone says but doesn’t really know what it means or where the logic of their statement actually takes them.
“We trot out our pet slogans whether secular ones or Christian ones— letting our catchphrases do the work that careful, thoughtful conversation should be doing instead.”
So most of his tactics involves asking ‘What do you mean by that?’ or ‘How did you come to that conclusion?’
This isn’t an exhaustive apologetics book that will give you all the answers— he assumes you already know why you believe in Christ and his teachings— but he does lay out some of the conversations he has on specific and common objections.
Here’s a few of the things he brings up- (it affirmed to me that he knows what he’s talking about because I think I’ve heard every single one of these multiple times but never with any actual argument for them)
- God used evolution to design the world.
- God can’t exist if there’s all this evil in the world.
- There’s no way to know anything about religion.
- You’re intolerant if you tell other people what to believe.
- The Bible was written by flawed human beings so it must be flawed.
- Science disproves miracles.
- You shouldn’t force your beliefs on other people.
- There is no objective morality. (He gives a series of questions to ask that really reveals that even if people make this claim they don’t actually live or think like it)
- I’m personally against abortion but I don’t believe in forcing my pro-life belief on other people.
- That’s just your interpretation.
- Religion is the source of evil in the world and more wars have been fought in the name of God than any other. (He provides a lot of facts to disprove this widely believed myth)
- The Council of Nicea determined which books should be in the Bible
- The Bible has been changed and translated differently for political reasons.
- Jesus never said anything about homosexuality.
As Koukl encourages, you don’t have to go out there and change everyone’s minds. You just have to be willing and ready to ask some questions and get to the heart of the claims people make and find out if they’ve really thought about what is true.
“It is always a step in the right direction when we help others to think more carefully. If nothing else, it gives them tools to assess the bigger questions that eventually come up.”
It doesn’t matter how fervently we believe it or how many other people believe the same things that we do. What matters is: what is true? what is reality?
I may not believe my house is on fire, but if it is in reality, that’s a big problem. So help people find out where the fire is.
Reality has a way of revealing itself. Faulty logic and arguments will fall like a roof with no posts. Sound arguments will stand under its own merits.
I liked when Koukl explained how faith in Christ is not an unreasonable faith, or as some would say ‘Faith is believing things we cannot know.’
Faith is not wishful thinking. We all live with faith in something— that our chair will hold us up, that a bus route will go according to the map, etc. There are good reasons for believing these things.
Faith in Christ is reasonable. There are many many reasons to believe what the Bible says is true and that what Jesus claimed was true.
“Faith and knowledge are not opposites in Scripture. The opposite of faith is not fact, but unbelief. The opposite of knowledge is not faith but ignorance.”
If having reasons for what we believe made our faith less, then our faith would be the strongest when there are absolutely no good reasons for believing it. That’s not how faith works. That wouldn’t make any sense.
There are many people out there putting out TikToks and YouTube videos with snappy lines that make it sound like they’re ‘taking down’ Christianity, and many people are ill-equipped to spot the lie or see the inconsistencies or poke holes in the theories.
They begin to feel defeated and wonder if what they’ve believed really is unreasonable. I actually saw that firsthand at a Christian college— people encountering questions they’d never had to answer before and then giving up on all of it instead of doing the work of finding the answers— because there are answers.
Koukl’s tactics help us understand our own faith but also how to identify when other rhetoric is falling short.
One of the sections towards the end of the book talks about changing our lingo and I thought that was helpful. There definitely is a Christian lingo and I can tell that people are turned off by certain terminology or just stop listening to you because they think they've heard it all before.
Koukl's suggestions for words to change make sense to me and I'll probably try to do it. Some of them are using 'my spiritual convictions' instead of 'my faith'. Instead of saying 'the Bible says' to try to quote from Jesus of Nazareth when you can or from the ancient Hebrew prophets (OT) or from the people Jesus trained to follow after him (NT) or from primary source documents (Gospels). Instead of saying 'sin' he calls it 'moral crimes' against God. Instead of 'unbelievers' he refers to 'those who believe differently.'
For the most part I tracked with everything he was saying, however, there were some dialogues he relayed that I wish I could have stepped in to play devil's advocate with him. Things I wanted to question him further on to see how he would respond or deal with certain objections that I thought of while reading.
I will say, that I can see what some reviewers are saying about the limit to these tactics.
For one, in an online forum, these tactics would be really hard to employ properly, but I think we can all agree that trying to talk about matters like this online is usually a dicey and non-advisable situation regardless; talking face-to-face is always best.
Two, I think a majority of his conversations are with strangers or acquaintances or in debates and formal arrangements. As readers we should use wisdom when applying these tactics and be aware of who we are talking to. If we are conversing with long-term relationships or people dealing with big life hardship, etc, the way we go about it will be different.
Some of the tactics are structured in ways that make sense in short one-off conversations and some should be applied differently if we’re talking about these things throughout a whole series of conversations.
I don’t think either of these things take away from the book. I think for the scope and purpose in what he was writing he accomplished something really good and helpful. As with all books and advice we take it in and apply it with wisdom.
The principles of this book are sound and even if you don’t like the title ‘Tactics’ it is what he was providing. Just because tactics can have a bad connotation doesn’t make the word or the book bad. Tactics are simply strategies.
We employ tactics all the time in other areas of life, why not be prepared when it comes to talking about the most important thing in our lives? I’d love a strategy for that. Speaking about truth with excellence seems like a God-honoring endeavor.
Recommendation
I would definitely recommend this book. Even if you don’t plan to go out and start a million conversations, it’s a great way to train your brain to understand belief systems and those who hold them. It will strengthen your own faith. It will give you confidence about a lot of buzzword claims that get thrown around a lot.
I do think it’s not the only book to be read about this. Especially if you don’t feel like you can give arguments for the things you believe, I would encourage you to read some other apologetics books that go through all the arguments in depth. Click the link below to get you started.
I would also recommend visiting www.str.org (Stand to Reason) which is a website Koukl is on that is full of articles and videos talking about all the things in the book. Or look up some of Koukl’s debates to see these tactics in action. He practices what he preaches and writes this book from a lot of experience. I think the website will be a nice resource to visit when a question comes up that I’m not sure how to respond to. I also think I will revisit this book often.
Discussion about truth is always important and this book will help you do it!
Thieves' Gambit by Kayvion Lewis
adventurous
lighthearted
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
5.0
“Know your exits, pick the best one. That was my thing, wasn’t it? Always knowing the best way out.”
“I was stealing my own future back.”
This was a fun read! It was Ocean’s Eleven— the youths version— mixed with… I don’t know, like Big Brother or something. I was going to have a better comparison than that but then I decided to stop thinking about it.
It’s a competition between a bunch of high school thieves that are part of big family thieving conglomerates. Winner gets one wish.
I’m always a fan of heist/competition type of stories. I like the planning, the gadgets, the tricks, the suspense. This had all of those components. You have to suspend some belief, but that comes with the territory. I had to just pretend all seventeen-year-olds are as competent and skilled as they were, which is fine.
I could definitely see this as a movie because it was action from start to finish. And it takes us all over the world from the Bahamas to Cannes, France, to Cairo, Egypt to the British Virgin Islands.
I wouldn’t say I was ever truly shocked. At 12% I had some suspicions that mostly turned out to come to fruition but I wasn’t mad about it. I think it needed to play out that way or I would have been disappointed.
Brief Synopsis
Our main character is Rosalyn Quest. She lives in the Bahamas with her mom and aunt. The Quest family has a monopoly on thieving in North America. From the time she was young Ross has been training to be part of the family business.
But the nature of their work requires isolation and anonymity and Ross is wanting a little more freedom and perhaps a friend or two. As she attempts to escape to a summer sports camp in the middle of one of their jobs, her mom is discovered and captured. The ransom? One billion dollars.
The only way to get that sum in such a short time is to accept her invitation into the Thieves’ Gambit and win her wish. Looks like she’s not quite done with the family business just yet.
The competition is in three parts, all of which require some sort of heist to steal something. The competition pool begins with 12 youths— including her archnemesis Noelia— and each phase narrows the pool further and further.
Ross’s biggest challenge is figuring out how to win if her number one rule in life is ‘Trust no one.’ Especially other thieves. She is forced to work with Devroe, and, of course, because this is a YA novel, sparks start flying. But is he for real? They all have a reason to win this gambit— what’s his?
“People will play you like a violin to get whatever they need from you. People you think are your friends, people you think you can trust, they’ll snap your heart in half and leave you to die.”
I thought the author did a good job of making all the characters different. They all came from different countries and had their own ‘thing’ and their own ‘look’. It helped keep them straight and be able to picture them.
This book had a little bit of Hunger Games in it in that Rosalyn had Katniss’s courage to not play the game the Game master— or in this case the Count— wants them to play. I’m not convinced true thieves would care the way she does, but then we wouldn’t like her, so it still works.
There is some violence but it’s not a dystopian book so it’s not dark and violent. Just, ya know, friendly shooting and punching and stuff.
Some have compared this to The Inheritance Games series. I have not read that yet so I can’t say either way. Part of me wonders if it would end up being too similar or if there is enough divergence to enjoy both. Feel free to let me know. From reading the Goodreads summary it seems like they both deal in the world of wealthy and privileged, but that series (well at least the first book) might have more puzzles and riddles and that type of stuff whereas this one was more about elaborate heists for valuable objects.
Recommendation
I would recommend this book. It’s fun, light, suspenseful in the sense of action and competition, and the characters are likeable. It is a YA novel and you can tell, but I still thought it was a compelling plot and we didn’t get too much in the weeds of teenage love which I was glad for since it’s not marketed as a romance and that’s not what I was looking for.
The second book in this series released this last November. I have it on my to-read list so we’ll see if it continues to be a series I recommend. It looks like it takes up 6 months after this book and will be a similar globe-trotting thieving competition.
For what I expect when I read YA novels, this was a great read!
[Content Advisory: 21 d-words and a use of BS; no sexual content]
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
“I was stealing my own future back.”
This was a fun read! It was Ocean’s Eleven— the youths version— mixed with… I don’t know, like Big Brother or something. I was going to have a better comparison than that but then I decided to stop thinking about it.
It’s a competition between a bunch of high school thieves that are part of big family thieving conglomerates. Winner gets one wish.
I’m always a fan of heist/competition type of stories. I like the planning, the gadgets, the tricks, the suspense. This had all of those components. You have to suspend some belief, but that comes with the territory. I had to just pretend all seventeen-year-olds are as competent and skilled as they were, which is fine.
I could definitely see this as a movie because it was action from start to finish. And it takes us all over the world from the Bahamas to Cannes, France, to Cairo, Egypt to the British Virgin Islands.
I wouldn’t say I was ever truly shocked. At 12% I had some suspicions that mostly turned out to come to fruition but I wasn’t mad about it. I think it needed to play out that way or I would have been disappointed.
Brief Synopsis
Our main character is Rosalyn Quest. She lives in the Bahamas with her mom and aunt. The Quest family has a monopoly on thieving in North America. From the time she was young Ross has been training to be part of the family business.
But the nature of their work requires isolation and anonymity and Ross is wanting a little more freedom and perhaps a friend or two. As she attempts to escape to a summer sports camp in the middle of one of their jobs, her mom is discovered and captured. The ransom? One billion dollars.
The only way to get that sum in such a short time is to accept her invitation into the Thieves’ Gambit and win her wish. Looks like she’s not quite done with the family business just yet.
The competition is in three parts, all of which require some sort of heist to steal something. The competition pool begins with 12 youths— including her archnemesis Noelia— and each phase narrows the pool further and further.
Ross’s biggest challenge is figuring out how to win if her number one rule in life is ‘Trust no one.’ Especially other thieves. She is forced to work with Devroe, and, of course, because this is a YA novel, sparks start flying. But is he for real? They all have a reason to win this gambit— what’s his?
“People will play you like a violin to get whatever they need from you. People you think are your friends, people you think you can trust, they’ll snap your heart in half and leave you to die.”
I thought the author did a good job of making all the characters different. They all came from different countries and had their own ‘thing’ and their own ‘look’. It helped keep them straight and be able to picture them.
This book had a little bit of Hunger Games in it in that Rosalyn had Katniss’s courage to not play the game the Game master— or in this case the Count— wants them to play. I’m not convinced true thieves would care the way she does, but then we wouldn’t like her, so it still works.
There is some violence but it’s not a dystopian book so it’s not dark and violent. Just, ya know, friendly shooting and punching and stuff.
Some have compared this to The Inheritance Games series. I have not read that yet so I can’t say either way. Part of me wonders if it would end up being too similar or if there is enough divergence to enjoy both. Feel free to let me know. From reading the Goodreads summary it seems like they both deal in the world of wealthy and privileged, but that series (well at least the first book) might have more puzzles and riddles and that type of stuff whereas this one was more about elaborate heists for valuable objects.
Recommendation
I would recommend this book. It’s fun, light, suspenseful in the sense of action and competition, and the characters are likeable. It is a YA novel and you can tell, but I still thought it was a compelling plot and we didn’t get too much in the weeds of teenage love which I was glad for since it’s not marketed as a romance and that’s not what I was looking for.
The second book in this series released this last November. I have it on my to-read list so we’ll see if it continues to be a series I recommend. It looks like it takes up 6 months after this book and will be a similar globe-trotting thieving competition.
For what I expect when I read YA novels, this was a great read!
[Content Advisory: 21 d-words and a use of BS; no sexual content]
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
The Anxious Generation: How The Great Rewiring of Childhood is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness by Jonathan Haidt
informative
medium-paced
4.0
“The Great Rewiring devastated the social lives of Gen Z by connecting them to everyone in the world and disconnecting them from the people around them.”
“It is very difficult to construct a meaningful life on one’s own, drifting through multiple disembodied networks.”
It was really interesting to read this book right after Abigail Shrier’s Bad Therapy book. They have slightly different premises.
Jonathan Haidt’s thesis is that parents have become too protective in the real world with not enough adventure and unsupervised play and not protective enough in the virtual world of social media, porn, and video games; the result being an increase in anxiety and mental illness in our children.
Shrier sees the increase in reported mental illness and recognizes the dangers of phone-based childhoods, but she speculates that perhaps, like transgenderism (in her book Irreversible Damage), it is now a trend to claim to have anxiety and mental health problems.
I wouldn’t say these two books are in cahoots or diametrically opposed. But both shed new light on the similar concern: mental health problems in our children. I believe both to be valuable reads, but do caution readers to use their own wisdom and common sense in processing what they read.
[I will also add that if my review is preaching to the choir for you, it’s possible that you may not want to spend the time reading the entire book unless you like to know all the data. It does get a little long and slightly repetitive where I can see where people who already know the harms of social media and phone usage and have actively created boundaries with their children/teens around it may not find the book as useful.]
I really loved Jonathan Haidt’s coauthored (Greg Lukianoff) book The Coddling of the American Mind. Definitely read that one if you haven’t yet.
I don’t think I loved The Anxious Generation as much as that one. I don’t know if it was because Lukianoff’s lawyer-side tempered Haidt’s psychological-side to balance the interpretation and explanataion of data or what, but this book felt a little too steeped in evolutionary descriptions of why we are where we are and why we need or want different things.
I’m not all about that and I’ll explain more later in my review.
Nonetheless, Haidt’s presentation of the data is compelling and it’s truly hard to argue that a cell-phone based childhood rather than a play-based childhood doesn’t have negative effects on our kids.
Another book that I would highly recommend is Tony Reinke’s 12 Ways Your Phone is Changing You. Reinke is fascinated by technology and writes to answer: “What is the best use of my smartphone in the flourishing of my life?”
Haidt organizes this book in four parts. He covers mental health trends since 2010, the nature of childhood and how we messed it up, a closer look at a phone-based childhood (including the differences between girls and boys), and wraps up with how to reverse the damage.
There is a lot of data and graphs in this book and I can’t cover it all in this review but I will just mention some things that stuck out to me.
“Impending threats to a nation or generation (as opposed to an individual) do not historically cause rates of mental illness to rise… People don’t get depressed when they face threats collectively; they get depressed when they feel isolated, lonely, or useless.”
I think this is a really important piece of information for a lot of reasons. We are meant to live in community. Face-to-face community. Social media connects us in some ways, but especially for adolescents who are still learning how to engage with others, community via social media will not teach them much of anything that translates to real life. The evidence just confirms what we already know Scripture teaches, though Haidt would prefer to list millions of years of evolution to explain it: it is not good for man to be alone; we are to carry one another’s burdens; be in fellowship with one another; we are all members of one body—the body of Christ—unified and working together; Hebrews 3:12-13.
In an article about the dangers of isolation, Segal says, “The more isolated we become, the more we cut ourselves off from the fountains of His grace, mercy, and guidance.” We miss out on “the foundation of a full and happy life.”
If we allow our kids (or ourselves) to isolate into a virtual world, the sacrifices to our mental, emotional, and spiritual health are much too many.
I also think it’s worth noting that those who decide not to have children because they don’t want to ‘bring them into a world like this’ are missing all the important parts of life. People have been having kids for generations during all kinds of turmoil, but just bringing kids into this world is not going to damage them. You’re giving them life and they will thrive in a community. You’re actually depriving yourself of the joys of children and a love you never thought possible. And to one of Haidt’s later points, you’re depriving yourself of a ‘wind’ that will strengthen and grow you as a person.
He talks a lot about play-based childhood. This is what he means by that:
“A play-based childhood is one in which kids spend the majority of their free time playing with friends in the real world as I defined it in the introduction: embodied, synchronous, one-to-one or one-to-several, and in groups or communities where there is some cost to join or leave so people invest in relationships.”
He fleshes each of those points out in the book, but I like how he points out that there is value to relationships and groups that come with a cost to join or leave. It does create an investment and a long-term mindset that the virtual world takes away. That’s why it’s so easy to dehumanize people online. When we’re not embodied or likely to see them again, we don’t see them as people. Real life relationships require nurturing because they are (hopefully) ongoing.
“Even for kids who never post anything, spending time on social media sites can still be harmful because of the chronic social comparison, the unachievable beauty standards, and the enormous amount of time taken away from everything else in life.”
“Social media platforms are therefore the most efficient conformity engines ever invented. They can shape an adolescent’s mental models of acceptable behavior in a matter of hours…”
How do kids learn? They mimic. He explains two forms of bias that signals what to copy: conformist (what is most common) and prestige (what is most accomplished/prestigious). The thing is, though, is that just because something is common or an influencer has a big following doesn’t mean that those things are good and should be followed. But if that’s what kids see in hours of scrolling, they can’t help but mimic it or be influenced by it.
They find ‘role models’ whose only credentials are that a million people happened to follow them. Some of these ‘role models’ are part of how the transgender craze took over teenage girls as Shrier describes in her book Irreversible Damage. That’s just one facet of influence, but you can be sure there are hundreds of others!
“On social media, the way to gain followers and likes is to be more extreme, so those who present with more extreme symptoms are likely to rise fastest, making them the models that everyone else locks onto for social learning… people get trained by their audiences to become more extreme versions of whatever it is the audience wants to see.”
I am an adult who knows all this information and yet I can tell when I spend too much time on certain platforms or websites I start to feel worse about myself even though I understand what’s happening in my brain. How much more susceptible are our kids?
I thought his illustration of growing trees in a biosphere was really compelling. The trees that scientists were trying to grow in these biospheres were collapsing under their own weight. Why? Because there was no wind in the biosphere. As the tree grows and the wind pushes against them their roots know to grow deeper to hold it up. When the wind variable was eliminated, the roots weren’t strong enough to hold up the weight of the full grown tree.
It’s the same way with our kids. If we protect them from all of life’s challenges, they don’t have opportunities to grow their ‘roots’ deeper so they can withstand greater challenges in their future. We want resilient kids. That means allowing them to experience discomfort and unfairness and pain.
Actually he uses the term ‘antifragile’ kids rather than resilient. Plastic cups don’t get better by constantly being knocked over, they just don’t get worse. It’s more like an immune system that gets stronger after being exposed to germs and fighting them off.
He quotes from the Stoics: “happiness comes from learning to deprive external events of the power to trigger negative emotions in you.”
We’re being overprotective if we don’t allow our kids to grow strong roots: “They may be blocking the development of competence, self-control, frustration tolerance, and emotional self-management.”
“the political divisiveness in the country can largely be attributed to social media and indoctrinating ourselves in a vacuum with the same rhetoric. I can usually tell the people who have thought through political issues for themselves from a variety of sources and those that only reiterate the commentary they say on their social media feeds”
This is perhaps less applicable to youths than adults, but the principle stands. The algorithms online are ridiculous and I would love if there could be legislation to prevent them from using them the way they do. I remember when my news feed used to be actual news from my actual friends. Now all I see are stupid ads that the platform thinks I’m interested in just because I stopped scrolling for two seconds to help my child and now they think I love hats made from cat fur.
It’s the same with political views. They have ADMITTED that they just show you more of what you like. The only thing missing from the vacuum is the actual cleaning up of dirt. I’ve experienced the same thing in real world discussions. A lot of people just repeat the slogans and the headlines; they haven’t actually thought for themselves.
Social media connects us to millions but it also divides us in big ways.
“Girls and boys are not identical psychologically. There are a number of reasons why girls’ core developmental needs are more easily exploited and subverted by social media than is the case for boys (whose needs are more easily exploited by video game companies.)”
For some reason we’re still having to explain to people that boys and girls are biologically different. Here’s yet another way. These chapters were really interesting to read.
For girls he talks about their visual social comparison and perfectionism, their aggression in relationships, how they share emotions and disorders, and are more susceptible to harassment.
For boys it’s less clear evidence-wise, but they point out the way girls are surpassing boys in school and how the workplace is more geared toward women now that physical labor jobs are decreasing.
I found this quote particularly enlightening considering the push towards female empowerment and society’s way of pushing down men in order to elevate women.
"A world of floundering men is unlikely to be a world of flourishing women.”
Another good book for boys specifically that I would recommend is The War Against Boys which affirms a lot of Haidt’s findings about why they aren’t succeeding as much in school.
I will also say here that social media sites like Instagram are targeting males with porn. My husband ended up just deleting Instagram after creating a profile for his trickshot videos. He showed me the ‘browse’ tab of his app and it’s all pornographic when he never searched, clicked, or engaged with anything of the story. But the app knows he’s a male. This kind of thing is an abuse and should be illegal. How hard it must be to resist these things when they’re constantly being paraded in our boys’ faces!
Which leads me to one of my biggest beefs with this book (other than his far from compelling evolutionary explanations): Haidt’s view of porn.
“I’m not saying that all pornography is harmful; I’m saying that immersing boys in an infinite playlist of hardcore porn video during the sensitive period in which the sexual centers of their brains are being rewired is maybe not so good for their sexual and romantic development, or for their future partners.”
I read this and thought- Wow! Could we take a softer stance on porn?! It’s not ALL harmful just MAYBE, CERTAIN types of porn at CERTAIN times of life MIGHT not be so good.
Sorry Haidt, I know you’re an intelligent human being, but I can’t think of a single positive thing that porn does for any person, ever. The industry itself is corrupt and is the catalyst for human trafficking all over the world. The number of relationships and marriages that porn ruins is staggering.
He says “10% of adolescent boys said they found pornography addicting” I don’t know if he believed this stat, but it’s clear that boys are not answering that question honestly. Was the other part of this that 80% found pornography VERY addicting?
Until we take a firmer stance on pornography there will be no positive progress. It’s just something that consumes you. Period. You can’t just dip your toes in the water. It pulls you in and it drowns you.
I would recommend reading this very short but very good book called The Porn Problem if you are believing the lie that porn is okay.
“I should point out that I am an atheist, but I find that I sometimes need words and concepts from religion to understand the experience of life as a human being.”
I thought it was very interesting that Haidt also admits that he believes everyone has a God-sized hole in their life. I am glad that Haidt appears to have some Christian friends in his life because honestly it felt like his constant reference to evolution was him trying to convince himself as much as the reader.
The principles Haidt explains in this book I thought, Oh that makes sense because God is this way or he created us this way, etc. And then Haidt would say something along the lines of ‘millions of years of evolution made our brains grow bigger so we could do such and such’ or ‘groups decided to be the most cohesive by creating religion’ etc. It feels like it takes a lot more faith to believe something as absurd and unproven as evolution when I see evidence of God every day. The Bible is the closest thing to explain what I see in the world today just like Haidt said— to understand the experience of life as a human being. God’s Word helps us understand our world better than anything else that has ever attempted to.
If you haven’t read it for yourself, I would encourage you to engage with the Bible and let it speak for itself. I think you’ll find a lot more truth and hope there than Haidt’s evolutionary theories.
And finally, Haidt devotes a few chapters explaining how governments, tech companies, schools, and parents can take action steps moving forward.
It’s possible that his suggested action steps may not make sense for everyone, but I appreciate that he took the time to set up a game plan. A lot of times books like this are just authors dropping knowledge and blasting walls and then peacing out- ‘So good luck with that!’
And that’s not helpful. We don’t always know what to do with the information. Haidt summarizes his points into four steps:
1. No smartphones before high school
2. No social media before 16
3. Phone-free schools
4. Far more unsupervised play and childhood independence
My kids’ school recently took a survey of parents and students regarding their cell phone policy and are looking at how to change it. I’d like schools to curb the use and presence of phones more.
My kids are young so a lot can change by the time they’re teenagers, but at this point I think I’m on board with No. 1 & 2. We already do quite a bit of the fourth one. They get limited TV time and they get some independence and a lot of play with other kids from a variety of ages.
I also liked his list of ages and things kids can do to gain more responsibility and independence— lots of good options in that list that I will try to implement.
It will be interesting to see how things go the more and more we learn the effects of our ever-changing technology.
Haidt reminds us that the tech world of today is far different from what it was 20-25 years ago. We have to be committed to understanding what we are exposing our kids to and be willing to make different choices for them and for their future.
Recommendation
There are a few books I’ve linked throughout my review that I may recommend more than this one, especially if you feel like you will already agree with most of what Haidt talks about in The Anxious Generation.
If you haven’t really given any of this much thought and you’re here because you feel like there’s something off with your children and their phone/social media usage, then I would definitely read the book because I think it will give you a lot to think about.
When I read his book The Coddling of the American Mind I was recommending it left and right. I think I feel a little more hesitant to recommend this one in the same way. I think it’s important but the execution of the book wasn’t my favorite, especially as a Christ follower. Although, I’ll reiterate that aside from his stance on evolution and porn, I didn’t really disagree with much of what he said.
If you’re not sure you want to tackle the whole book, I think it would still be beneficial to just pick a chapter or few that look most interesting to you. At the end of each chapter Haidt has an ‘In Sum’ section that covers in short all of what was discussed for that chapter. You may find it easier to just read those to help you determine which parts you want to read more in-depth.
If you want to continue to follow along my original post has links to his research.
“It is very difficult to construct a meaningful life on one’s own, drifting through multiple disembodied networks.”
It was really interesting to read this book right after Abigail Shrier’s Bad Therapy book. They have slightly different premises.
Jonathan Haidt’s thesis is that parents have become too protective in the real world with not enough adventure and unsupervised play and not protective enough in the virtual world of social media, porn, and video games; the result being an increase in anxiety and mental illness in our children.
Shrier sees the increase in reported mental illness and recognizes the dangers of phone-based childhoods, but she speculates that perhaps, like transgenderism (in her book Irreversible Damage), it is now a trend to claim to have anxiety and mental health problems.
I wouldn’t say these two books are in cahoots or diametrically opposed. But both shed new light on the similar concern: mental health problems in our children. I believe both to be valuable reads, but do caution readers to use their own wisdom and common sense in processing what they read.
[I will also add that if my review is preaching to the choir for you, it’s possible that you may not want to spend the time reading the entire book unless you like to know all the data. It does get a little long and slightly repetitive where I can see where people who already know the harms of social media and phone usage and have actively created boundaries with their children/teens around it may not find the book as useful.]
I really loved Jonathan Haidt’s coauthored (Greg Lukianoff) book The Coddling of the American Mind. Definitely read that one if you haven’t yet.
I don’t think I loved The Anxious Generation as much as that one. I don’t know if it was because Lukianoff’s lawyer-side tempered Haidt’s psychological-side to balance the interpretation and explanataion of data or what, but this book felt a little too steeped in evolutionary descriptions of why we are where we are and why we need or want different things.
I’m not all about that and I’ll explain more later in my review.
Nonetheless, Haidt’s presentation of the data is compelling and it’s truly hard to argue that a cell-phone based childhood rather than a play-based childhood doesn’t have negative effects on our kids.
Another book that I would highly recommend is Tony Reinke’s 12 Ways Your Phone is Changing You. Reinke is fascinated by technology and writes to answer: “What is the best use of my smartphone in the flourishing of my life?”
Haidt organizes this book in four parts. He covers mental health trends since 2010, the nature of childhood and how we messed it up, a closer look at a phone-based childhood (including the differences between girls and boys), and wraps up with how to reverse the damage.
There is a lot of data and graphs in this book and I can’t cover it all in this review but I will just mention some things that stuck out to me.
“Impending threats to a nation or generation (as opposed to an individual) do not historically cause rates of mental illness to rise… People don’t get depressed when they face threats collectively; they get depressed when they feel isolated, lonely, or useless.”
I think this is a really important piece of information for a lot of reasons. We are meant to live in community. Face-to-face community. Social media connects us in some ways, but especially for adolescents who are still learning how to engage with others, community via social media will not teach them much of anything that translates to real life. The evidence just confirms what we already know Scripture teaches, though Haidt would prefer to list millions of years of evolution to explain it: it is not good for man to be alone; we are to carry one another’s burdens; be in fellowship with one another; we are all members of one body—the body of Christ—unified and working together; Hebrews 3:12-13.
In an article about the dangers of isolation, Segal says, “The more isolated we become, the more we cut ourselves off from the fountains of His grace, mercy, and guidance.” We miss out on “the foundation of a full and happy life.”
If we allow our kids (or ourselves) to isolate into a virtual world, the sacrifices to our mental, emotional, and spiritual health are much too many.
I also think it’s worth noting that those who decide not to have children because they don’t want to ‘bring them into a world like this’ are missing all the important parts of life. People have been having kids for generations during all kinds of turmoil, but just bringing kids into this world is not going to damage them. You’re giving them life and they will thrive in a community. You’re actually depriving yourself of the joys of children and a love you never thought possible. And to one of Haidt’s later points, you’re depriving yourself of a ‘wind’ that will strengthen and grow you as a person.
He talks a lot about play-based childhood. This is what he means by that:
“A play-based childhood is one in which kids spend the majority of their free time playing with friends in the real world as I defined it in the introduction: embodied, synchronous, one-to-one or one-to-several, and in groups or communities where there is some cost to join or leave so people invest in relationships.”
He fleshes each of those points out in the book, but I like how he points out that there is value to relationships and groups that come with a cost to join or leave. It does create an investment and a long-term mindset that the virtual world takes away. That’s why it’s so easy to dehumanize people online. When we’re not embodied or likely to see them again, we don’t see them as people. Real life relationships require nurturing because they are (hopefully) ongoing.
“Even for kids who never post anything, spending time on social media sites can still be harmful because of the chronic social comparison, the unachievable beauty standards, and the enormous amount of time taken away from everything else in life.”
“Social media platforms are therefore the most efficient conformity engines ever invented. They can shape an adolescent’s mental models of acceptable behavior in a matter of hours…”
How do kids learn? They mimic. He explains two forms of bias that signals what to copy: conformist (what is most common) and prestige (what is most accomplished/prestigious). The thing is, though, is that just because something is common or an influencer has a big following doesn’t mean that those things are good and should be followed. But if that’s what kids see in hours of scrolling, they can’t help but mimic it or be influenced by it.
They find ‘role models’ whose only credentials are that a million people happened to follow them. Some of these ‘role models’ are part of how the transgender craze took over teenage girls as Shrier describes in her book Irreversible Damage. That’s just one facet of influence, but you can be sure there are hundreds of others!
“On social media, the way to gain followers and likes is to be more extreme, so those who present with more extreme symptoms are likely to rise fastest, making them the models that everyone else locks onto for social learning… people get trained by their audiences to become more extreme versions of whatever it is the audience wants to see.”
I am an adult who knows all this information and yet I can tell when I spend too much time on certain platforms or websites I start to feel worse about myself even though I understand what’s happening in my brain. How much more susceptible are our kids?
I thought his illustration of growing trees in a biosphere was really compelling. The trees that scientists were trying to grow in these biospheres were collapsing under their own weight. Why? Because there was no wind in the biosphere. As the tree grows and the wind pushes against them their roots know to grow deeper to hold it up. When the wind variable was eliminated, the roots weren’t strong enough to hold up the weight of the full grown tree.
It’s the same way with our kids. If we protect them from all of life’s challenges, they don’t have opportunities to grow their ‘roots’ deeper so they can withstand greater challenges in their future. We want resilient kids. That means allowing them to experience discomfort and unfairness and pain.
Actually he uses the term ‘antifragile’ kids rather than resilient. Plastic cups don’t get better by constantly being knocked over, they just don’t get worse. It’s more like an immune system that gets stronger after being exposed to germs and fighting them off.
He quotes from the Stoics: “happiness comes from learning to deprive external events of the power to trigger negative emotions in you.”
We’re being overprotective if we don’t allow our kids to grow strong roots: “They may be blocking the development of competence, self-control, frustration tolerance, and emotional self-management.”
“the political divisiveness in the country can largely be attributed to social media and indoctrinating ourselves in a vacuum with the same rhetoric. I can usually tell the people who have thought through political issues for themselves from a variety of sources and those that only reiterate the commentary they say on their social media feeds”
This is perhaps less applicable to youths than adults, but the principle stands. The algorithms online are ridiculous and I would love if there could be legislation to prevent them from using them the way they do. I remember when my news feed used to be actual news from my actual friends. Now all I see are stupid ads that the platform thinks I’m interested in just because I stopped scrolling for two seconds to help my child and now they think I love hats made from cat fur.
It’s the same with political views. They have ADMITTED that they just show you more of what you like. The only thing missing from the vacuum is the actual cleaning up of dirt. I’ve experienced the same thing in real world discussions. A lot of people just repeat the slogans and the headlines; they haven’t actually thought for themselves.
Social media connects us to millions but it also divides us in big ways.
“Girls and boys are not identical psychologically. There are a number of reasons why girls’ core developmental needs are more easily exploited and subverted by social media than is the case for boys (whose needs are more easily exploited by video game companies.)”
For some reason we’re still having to explain to people that boys and girls are biologically different. Here’s yet another way. These chapters were really interesting to read.
For girls he talks about their visual social comparison and perfectionism, their aggression in relationships, how they share emotions and disorders, and are more susceptible to harassment.
For boys it’s less clear evidence-wise, but they point out the way girls are surpassing boys in school and how the workplace is more geared toward women now that physical labor jobs are decreasing.
I found this quote particularly enlightening considering the push towards female empowerment and society’s way of pushing down men in order to elevate women.
"A world of floundering men is unlikely to be a world of flourishing women.”
Another good book for boys specifically that I would recommend is The War Against Boys which affirms a lot of Haidt’s findings about why they aren’t succeeding as much in school.
I will also say here that social media sites like Instagram are targeting males with porn. My husband ended up just deleting Instagram after creating a profile for his trickshot videos. He showed me the ‘browse’ tab of his app and it’s all pornographic when he never searched, clicked, or engaged with anything of the story. But the app knows he’s a male. This kind of thing is an abuse and should be illegal. How hard it must be to resist these things when they’re constantly being paraded in our boys’ faces!
Which leads me to one of my biggest beefs with this book (other than his far from compelling evolutionary explanations): Haidt’s view of porn.
“I’m not saying that all pornography is harmful; I’m saying that immersing boys in an infinite playlist of hardcore porn video during the sensitive period in which the sexual centers of their brains are being rewired is maybe not so good for their sexual and romantic development, or for their future partners.”
I read this and thought- Wow! Could we take a softer stance on porn?! It’s not ALL harmful just MAYBE, CERTAIN types of porn at CERTAIN times of life MIGHT not be so good.
Sorry Haidt, I know you’re an intelligent human being, but I can’t think of a single positive thing that porn does for any person, ever. The industry itself is corrupt and is the catalyst for human trafficking all over the world. The number of relationships and marriages that porn ruins is staggering.
He says “10% of adolescent boys said they found pornography addicting” I don’t know if he believed this stat, but it’s clear that boys are not answering that question honestly. Was the other part of this that 80% found pornography VERY addicting?
Until we take a firmer stance on pornography there will be no positive progress. It’s just something that consumes you. Period. You can’t just dip your toes in the water. It pulls you in and it drowns you.
I would recommend reading this very short but very good book called The Porn Problem if you are believing the lie that porn is okay.
“I should point out that I am an atheist, but I find that I sometimes need words and concepts from religion to understand the experience of life as a human being.”
I thought it was very interesting that Haidt also admits that he believes everyone has a God-sized hole in their life. I am glad that Haidt appears to have some Christian friends in his life because honestly it felt like his constant reference to evolution was him trying to convince himself as much as the reader.
The principles Haidt explains in this book I thought, Oh that makes sense because God is this way or he created us this way, etc. And then Haidt would say something along the lines of ‘millions of years of evolution made our brains grow bigger so we could do such and such’ or ‘groups decided to be the most cohesive by creating religion’ etc. It feels like it takes a lot more faith to believe something as absurd and unproven as evolution when I see evidence of God every day. The Bible is the closest thing to explain what I see in the world today just like Haidt said— to understand the experience of life as a human being. God’s Word helps us understand our world better than anything else that has ever attempted to.
If you haven’t read it for yourself, I would encourage you to engage with the Bible and let it speak for itself. I think you’ll find a lot more truth and hope there than Haidt’s evolutionary theories.
And finally, Haidt devotes a few chapters explaining how governments, tech companies, schools, and parents can take action steps moving forward.
It’s possible that his suggested action steps may not make sense for everyone, but I appreciate that he took the time to set up a game plan. A lot of times books like this are just authors dropping knowledge and blasting walls and then peacing out- ‘So good luck with that!’
And that’s not helpful. We don’t always know what to do with the information. Haidt summarizes his points into four steps:
1. No smartphones before high school
2. No social media before 16
3. Phone-free schools
4. Far more unsupervised play and childhood independence
My kids’ school recently took a survey of parents and students regarding their cell phone policy and are looking at how to change it. I’d like schools to curb the use and presence of phones more.
My kids are young so a lot can change by the time they’re teenagers, but at this point I think I’m on board with No. 1 & 2. We already do quite a bit of the fourth one. They get limited TV time and they get some independence and a lot of play with other kids from a variety of ages.
I also liked his list of ages and things kids can do to gain more responsibility and independence— lots of good options in that list that I will try to implement.
It will be interesting to see how things go the more and more we learn the effects of our ever-changing technology.
Haidt reminds us that the tech world of today is far different from what it was 20-25 years ago. We have to be committed to understanding what we are exposing our kids to and be willing to make different choices for them and for their future.
Recommendation
There are a few books I’ve linked throughout my review that I may recommend more than this one, especially if you feel like you will already agree with most of what Haidt talks about in The Anxious Generation.
If you haven’t really given any of this much thought and you’re here because you feel like there’s something off with your children and their phone/social media usage, then I would definitely read the book because I think it will give you a lot to think about.
When I read his book The Coddling of the American Mind I was recommending it left and right. I think I feel a little more hesitant to recommend this one in the same way. I think it’s important but the execution of the book wasn’t my favorite, especially as a Christ follower. Although, I’ll reiterate that aside from his stance on evolution and porn, I didn’t really disagree with much of what he said.
If you’re not sure you want to tackle the whole book, I think it would still be beneficial to just pick a chapter or few that look most interesting to you. At the end of each chapter Haidt has an ‘In Sum’ section that covers in short all of what was discussed for that chapter. You may find it easier to just read those to help you determine which parts you want to read more in-depth.
If you want to continue to follow along my original post has links to his research.
The Fury by Alex Michaelides
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
“I feel duty bound to inform you that this is not a whodunit… If anything, it’s a whydunit— a character study, an examination of who we are; and why we do the things we do.”
“This is a tale of murder. Or maybe that’s not quite true. At its heart, it’s a love story, isn’t it? The saddest kind of love story— about the end of love; the death of love. So I guess I was right the first time.”
When I started this and read about Greece, Leo, a movie star, and a murder, I had to do a double take, but no, this was not me accidentally re-reading Moonflower Murders.
The Fury is pretty in line with Michaelides’ other two books- The Silent Patient and The Maidens. Both of those had some polarizing reviews and this one did as well. I think it must just be Michaelides’ way of writing and story concepts that has people frustrated for some reason.
I mean I wouldn’t call all of his books five star, must-reads, but I feel like I enjoy them when I read them. It’s only after I see other people’s comments that it taints my view a little bit. So since it’s been like that for all three books, I think it’s just a matter of- is this the author for you or not? And so I’ve decided I enjoy his books even though others might find them slow, or messy, or unrealistic. I don’t necessarily feel those things.
This book is a little different than the other two in that we are being told this story by a narrator— Elliot— who is also one of the characters in the story. He addresses us, readers, directly as he gives us his account, divided into a five-act-play. We are essentially at the mercy of what he decides to tell us, how he tells it to us, and when. We are not given all the information all the time.
He tells us at the beginning: “We are all the unreliable narrators of our own lives.”
And so, we are already on guard, wondering where Elliot is going in his storytelling and what we are to make of it.
The main plot of the book is that this group of friends is on an isolated Greek island when one of them turns up dead.
The narration is not strictly chronological. Elliot takes liberties to backtrack to days or years prior to give us more background and context. He also takes some artistic liberties in some parts because he doesn’t know exactly how it happens. In other cases we are left to assume he was told information from other characters in the story.
In short, I would describe this story as theatrical and layered.
Cast of Characters
Lana-recently retired movie actress
“Lana and I weren’t just friends— we were soulmates.”
Leo- Lana’s son
“A gentle soul, like his mother.”
Nikos-island caretaker
“Nikos lived a solitary existence on Aura… He spent too much time alone. Sometimes he wondered if he was going mad.”
Jason-Lana’s husband
“Jason wasn’t a man. he was just a kid, playing make-believe. And kids shouldn’t play with guns.”
Kate-Lana’s best friend, also an actress
“There’s something you should know about Kate—she had quite a temper.”
Agathi-Lana’s personal assistant/housekeeper
“She didn’t care where she went, as long as she was with Lana. She was so completely under Lana’s spell, in those days.”
Elliot-our narrator; friend to Lana; victim of abuse in his childhood
“I believed I had to change everything about me: my name, my appearance, how I carried myself, how I spoke, what I talked about, thought about. To be part of this brave new world, I needed to become a different person— a better one. And eventually, one day, I succeeded.”
Just like Michaelides’ other books, this isn’t really one you read because the characters are lovable— they’re not. And Elliot does get to be annoying at times. But you read it for the plot because you you have to know who dies, who killed them, and why.
I think I had a good chunk of it figured out by chapter six, but I still enjoyed reading it and there were a few things at the end that were unexpected which was nice!
There is a fun cameo of Marianna from The Maidens— she is Elliot’s therapist. There is also a cameo of Theo from The Silent Patient but I won’t tell you in what capacity because of spoilers.
If you do this book for a book club, I thought a good discussion question would be centered around some of Elliot’s comments about his inner child and his Wizard of Oz theory:
“I have a pet theory that everyone in life corresponds to one of the characters in The Wizard of Oz. There’s Dorothy Gale, a lost child, looking for a place to belong; an insecure, neurotic Scarecrow, seeking intellectual validation; and a bullying Lion, really a coward, more afraid than everyone else. And the Tin Man, minus a heart.”
If you had to put yourself into one of these categories, which would you choose and why?
Do you agree with his assessment?
Sometimes I think we over psychoanalyze ourselves and our childhood trauma, or go looking for some where there isn’t any. Obviously there is a lot of real trauma for a lot of people, but if we ruminate on it and always look for ways to connect it to our lives and our relationships, I wonder if we can ever really heal from it or if we’re allowing it too much power in our lives. At some point, we have to move beyond our trauma. What that exactly looks like will be different for every person, but it’s something I’ve been thinking about recently, especially after reading Bad Therapy.
Recommendation
If you were not a fan of Alex Michaelides’ other books, I can’t imagine this will be that much different for you.
If you liked his other books, I think you should give this one a shot.
If you haven’t read any of his books yet, I would read them in order because the cameos could give away a spoiler or two.
I do find his books worth a read even if other reviewers do not. At least at this point I still do. I’ll never say never.
[Content Advisory: 41 f- words, 8 s-words; mention of an affair but no sexual content]
“This is a tale of murder. Or maybe that’s not quite true. At its heart, it’s a love story, isn’t it? The saddest kind of love story— about the end of love; the death of love. So I guess I was right the first time.”
When I started this and read about Greece, Leo, a movie star, and a murder, I had to do a double take, but no, this was not me accidentally re-reading Moonflower Murders.
The Fury is pretty in line with Michaelides’ other two books- The Silent Patient and The Maidens. Both of those had some polarizing reviews and this one did as well. I think it must just be Michaelides’ way of writing and story concepts that has people frustrated for some reason.
I mean I wouldn’t call all of his books five star, must-reads, but I feel like I enjoy them when I read them. It’s only after I see other people’s comments that it taints my view a little bit. So since it’s been like that for all three books, I think it’s just a matter of- is this the author for you or not? And so I’ve decided I enjoy his books even though others might find them slow, or messy, or unrealistic. I don’t necessarily feel those things.
This book is a little different than the other two in that we are being told this story by a narrator— Elliot— who is also one of the characters in the story. He addresses us, readers, directly as he gives us his account, divided into a five-act-play. We are essentially at the mercy of what he decides to tell us, how he tells it to us, and when. We are not given all the information all the time.
He tells us at the beginning: “We are all the unreliable narrators of our own lives.”
And so, we are already on guard, wondering where Elliot is going in his storytelling and what we are to make of it.
The main plot of the book is that this group of friends is on an isolated Greek island when one of them turns up dead.
The narration is not strictly chronological. Elliot takes liberties to backtrack to days or years prior to give us more background and context. He also takes some artistic liberties in some parts because he doesn’t know exactly how it happens. In other cases we are left to assume he was told information from other characters in the story.
In short, I would describe this story as theatrical and layered.
Cast of Characters
Lana-recently retired movie actress
“Lana and I weren’t just friends— we were soulmates.”
Leo- Lana’s son
“A gentle soul, like his mother.”
Nikos-island caretaker
“Nikos lived a solitary existence on Aura… He spent too much time alone. Sometimes he wondered if he was going mad.”
Jason-Lana’s husband
“Jason wasn’t a man. he was just a kid, playing make-believe. And kids shouldn’t play with guns.”
Kate-Lana’s best friend, also an actress
“There’s something you should know about Kate—she had quite a temper.”
Agathi-Lana’s personal assistant/housekeeper
“She didn’t care where she went, as long as she was with Lana. She was so completely under Lana’s spell, in those days.”
Elliot-our narrator; friend to Lana; victim of abuse in his childhood
“I believed I had to change everything about me: my name, my appearance, how I carried myself, how I spoke, what I talked about, thought about. To be part of this brave new world, I needed to become a different person— a better one. And eventually, one day, I succeeded.”
Just like Michaelides’ other books, this isn’t really one you read because the characters are lovable— they’re not. And Elliot does get to be annoying at times. But you read it for the plot because you you have to know who dies, who killed them, and why.
I think I had a good chunk of it figured out by chapter six, but I still enjoyed reading it and there were a few things at the end that were unexpected which was nice!
There is a fun cameo of Marianna from The Maidens— she is Elliot’s therapist. There is also a cameo of Theo from The Silent Patient but I won’t tell you in what capacity because of spoilers.
If you do this book for a book club, I thought a good discussion question would be centered around some of Elliot’s comments about his inner child and his Wizard of Oz theory:
“I have a pet theory that everyone in life corresponds to one of the characters in The Wizard of Oz. There’s Dorothy Gale, a lost child, looking for a place to belong; an insecure, neurotic Scarecrow, seeking intellectual validation; and a bullying Lion, really a coward, more afraid than everyone else. And the Tin Man, minus a heart.”
If you had to put yourself into one of these categories, which would you choose and why?
Do you agree with his assessment?
Sometimes I think we over psychoanalyze ourselves and our childhood trauma, or go looking for some where there isn’t any. Obviously there is a lot of real trauma for a lot of people, but if we ruminate on it and always look for ways to connect it to our lives and our relationships, I wonder if we can ever really heal from it or if we’re allowing it too much power in our lives. At some point, we have to move beyond our trauma. What that exactly looks like will be different for every person, but it’s something I’ve been thinking about recently, especially after reading Bad Therapy.
Recommendation
If you were not a fan of Alex Michaelides’ other books, I can’t imagine this will be that much different for you.
If you liked his other books, I think you should give this one a shot.
If you haven’t read any of his books yet, I would read them in order because the cameos could give away a spoiler or two.
I do find his books worth a read even if other reviewers do not. At least at this point I still do. I’ll never say never.
[Content Advisory: 41 f- words, 8 s-words; mention of an affair but no sexual content]
Content Warnings
Moderate: Cursing