The Wisdom of Psychopaths: What Saints, Spies, and Serial Killers Can Teach Us About Success

It is absolutely no secret I have one of those mild fascinations with psychopaths - not the kind where I have books and books and books on the topic, and spend my life trying to understand the mindset, but the kind where I legitimately find the idea of having on/off switches that control how and what we define as our personalities - I don't get it, so I'm fascinated by it. This book makes the claim there are times when a "me" focused philosophy is beneficial to your well being, and to that I say obviously. It's no secret that for years people have been saying top executives have a climb their way to the top no matter what mentality and it works.  Personally, I found the author's use of the game of chicken as a time when being a psychopath is a good thing - the person who keeps going straight wins over the person who swerves.  .... .... ... yes.  In theory. That's a great example. In terms of real world applications, I'm pretty sure when there are millions of lives at stake we don't really want this to be something that's a thing.  One reviewer said "One Cuban Missile Crisis is enough" and yeah, that.

That being said, I genuinely really really really liked this book. It was fascinating. I loved the comparison between psychopaths and Tibetan monks in their mutual ability to detect deep emotions that are invisible to others - the sense of isolation and self-focus making people more adept at being aware of others is an enticing thought to base something out of. Tibetan monks spend lifetimes learning to be in a relaxed state of mind, and the fact that psychopaths are in this state without any sort of practiced state of mind, but rather a state of mind naturally aimed at being observant specifically of other peoples weakness' is just plain interesting.  Some things were obvious (if you watch any tv crime drama), such as psychopaths not feeling any sort of normal reactions when viewing horrifying images implies an almost baffling self-mastery of emotions. This being said Dutton points out that they seem to be born with this capacity to not feel and react, but his comparison to high performing CEO's, high-stress surgeons and military/rescue strategists results in a interesting discussion on the nature vs. nurture standoff. What makes some people serial killers and others at times heros?

So the long and the short is I think this book is fascinating, and really a compelling study of psychopaths for the layman.  Psychopaths may well be all around us, and arguably they're some of the most productive members of society. Dutton points out we don't recognize them because they have“…the consummate ability to pass themselves off as normal everyday folk, while behind the façade—the brutal brilliant disguise—beats the refrigerated heart of a ruthless, glacial predator.”

Dutton's writing was fantastic and verging on brilliant because he has a unique ability to make a non-fiction book interesting, accessible and informative in a way that doesn't make you feel like you're being talked down to. I've said for a while now that Normal is usually a lie, and damn if this book doesn't back it up.  That freaks me out a little more than I'm willing to admit.


*** Review is based on an advance copy from the publisher. Blah Blah this didn't affect my review. Promise.

Scent of Magic

So it's no real secret I like Maria V. Snyder. I blogged about her here and here and Scent of Magic didn't disappoint. I've said it before, and I'll say it again too: I'm constantly shocked and admittedly a lot impressed with what Harlequin MIRA and  Harlequin LNA are putting out on the market (no, they didn't pay me to say that. Actually I'm pretty sure they would pay me not to say that). I remember after reading the 500 Kingdom's books by Mercedes Lackey I was baffled that they were put out by Harlequin - so bravo Harlequin.  You should hire me to be a librarian, or something. So all that being said, Snyder is great, and her books are solid. Generally.

More specifically this is a great part 2 of the trilogy - character building is solid, there are the expected twists and turns and it's all in all a fun read. I really like where Snyder is taking the book - the whole Death Lily/Life Lily is a really interesting discussion point that it's entirely possible I'm reading too much into. Snyder's writing doesn't fall into the romance trap - a lot of the book is spent with the two main love interests apart from each other, and while Snyder carefully keeps them thinking of each other, they aren't wrapped up in a (usually tiring) "missing" of the other one. I was admittedly a touch annoyed at the alternating between Avry and Kerrick in the first and third person points of view - and that each portion ends with a cliffhanger gets to be a little overdone.  That being said, the adventure is exciting, and arguably most important the plot is plausible and realistic.  Blah blah blah it's fantasy-ish, but Snyder builds her books on a realistic fantasy. Is that a thing? My review, so yes. Yes it is.

As a bit of an aside, I think one of the things I like most about Snyder's writing is the attention she pays to the secondary characters - she really builds a world and it's clear she focus' on each character in a way that shows a lot of thought to their growth, change, and adaptability.

Overall thoughts: I really enjoy Snyder's writing, characters and plot development and this is pretty much exactly how I personally think a teen/YA romance/adventure book should be written. The cliffhangers? They were a bit much by the end.


*** Review is based on an advance copy from NetGalley. Blah Blah this didn't affect my review. Promise.

House of Leaves

I don't think I've been less able to write a review for a book than I feel I am for this book. And I mean that in a holy shit it was amazing way. I've heard it said that there's a cult following for this book, and I 100% ended up sitting in the woods, clutching this book and giving all my possessions to the leader. Leader is good ya'll. I don't know how I didn't read this book for so long, but my BFF is reading it and told me to pick it up. My BFF is finishing her phD in neurogenetics or *something* complicated like that, and reads a solid mix of amazing books, and romance novels (hey, similar to my reading a solid mix of amazing books and urban fantasy) (I suggest reading UF personally though).

So here's the thing. This book fucked me up. I'm sorry to swear, but there's no other way to say it. Usually I cope with books that disturb  me by taking forever to read them. I was done this book in two days, and I'm relatively sure this book should actually be classified as a category three narcotic because the dreams I had were not ok. I don't normally summarize books because I like to give my feelings - I feel it makes the review more of a feeling based review, I want to tell you why I think you should or shouldn't read the book. Or flat out tell you to go read it. The thing is I cannot summarize this book. Yes, I read it, but this book is basically the definition of metafiction. Have you read Raw Shark Texts? It's kind of like that but it takes it about 20 levels further in terms of making you want to talk about life, the universe and everything. 

So here: 

• It had footnotes. I love footnotes
• Played around with typography and colours. A+
• Metaphysical Space Time Continuum house? Maybe? Excellent.
• I actually said "Jesus" out loud while reading it.

I don't even know. I loved this book. In case that's not clear. It's probably not clear, because shut the front door what just happened. But I loved this book. I also hated Raw Shark Texts so take from that what you will. 

Touch of Power

So I generally hate reading the first book of a trilogy - something about how I finish and want to keep reading. Instant gratification at its best/worst.  The thing is I really really do like Maria V. Snyder. I couldn't put down Study series, it was fantastic and I really wanted something that was an easy read, but not a boring read (and I mean this in the best possible way).  Snyder reminds me a lot of Tamora Price - strong characters, solid plotlines, great pacing and romance that doesn't make you roll your eyes and go "Really?"

All that held pretty true to form for this book. For lack of a better term this is a lovely book. There are twists and turns and adventure and while there are a few gaps in the flow of some background information, I'm pretty sure that will come out in the next two off the series. There's also a lovely bit of whimsy - human eating plants make a surprisingly fantastic plot point. Who knew?  Generally it's just a very very readable story - I'm sparing you the summary because it's *everywhere*.  So here's the deal. I'm a librarian. I was turned onto Snyder by someone who works at a bookstore. So it's not that I know everything, or even that she and I know everything. But what we DO know is books.  With exceptions for personal tastes, two people who know books say go read this writer. I *personally* liked her Study series a bit more, but that being said I read the whole Study series, and not just the first book.

So go, read it. Trust me, I'm a librarian.

The Antidote: Happiness for People Who Can't Stand Positive Thinking

Full Disclosure I won this book as a Goodreads Firstreads. The thing is though, I entered the contest because I read the summary and immediately laughed because hand to god this book was almost exactly a conversation I was having with a good friend recently.  Basically we were talking about how we find the whole "self-help" thing boring.  My problems (not that I have any, obviously) do not stem from me not having any faith in my ability to get through things, so why do I need to wake up everyday and tell myself it will be a good day. Sometimes it isn't. You deal, and you move on.


... Anyways.

So the stars aligned and I won this book.  I was pretty excited, because you know, I wanted it.  Burkeman is a writer for The Guardian who (I believe?) (I should know this) (If not know, find out, since I'm a Librarian and it's what I do) explores psychology in his weekly column. The Antidote looks at finding contentment from different perspectives, moving your focus outside of yourself, not focusing on finding security, realizing your own mistakes and weakness and sometimes damnit realizing that being negative is actually the most positive outlook you can have. Basically this books is giving legitimacy to something we all kind of hoped - it's ok to not be perfect, it's ok to not be happy, it's ok to just plow through some things muttering to yourself about how this bleeding sucks and you just want it to be over so you just get. it. done. 

So long story short, I loved this book. It's funny, and smart and counterintuitive enough that it makes a whole damn lot of sense. What it's not is a self-help book. Well for me it almost was - it's one thing to have your friends agree with you - it's another thing when somebody wrote a whole book with actual facts about how it's ok to not force yourself to be happy.

So go. Buy a copy. Take out out from the library. Lend it to a friend (or few).  But make them buy their own copy after, because They should probably lend it to their friends.

The Witches of Chiswick

You can't even imagine how much I wanted to like this book.  The awkward thing is I say that EVERY time I pick up a new Rankin Book.  The thing is when Rankin is good, he's really shut the front door good. Funny, strange, ridiculous break the fourth wall hilarious, mildly eccentric blah blah.  When he's bad though (and please please cult following don't hurt me) he's basically unreadable.  This one oddly fell smack dab in the middle for me.  I was almost embarrassingly apathetic about this book. I started reading this APRIL TENTH. That's 5 months ago. It doesn't take me 5 months to ready ANY book. I just kept picking it up, reading half a chapter and then getting distracted.  When I read it, I could kind of get into it, but it didn't grab onto me, and by the time I finished it I was just left... apathetic.

I was mildly annoyed (and it's been echo'd on other reviews) that there were too many loose ends and that there was a little too much of the book aimed at people who've read every one of Rankin's other books. I've read a few (ok, more than a few) but apparently not enough because there were times I was left a little too confused... I don't even know.

I think it bothers me because I want to love all of Rankin's books. Like, I really really want to. I love the idea of the world he's built, with paradoxes, time travel, witches (non-existant, but still kinda there. I guess). I dunno. This is a terrible review. I don't even know.

Magic of Saida

I received this book as an ARC, sent to me by the publisher, and I finished it a few days ago and am still processing it. This will be a bit of an odd review (but really, most of mine have been recently). I think what's holding me back is I always want to write a review that lets people know what I felt about the book, and if I think they would enjoy it. I keep coming up empty, because all I can think is that this book was just lovely. 

In the best possible way, I don't quite know what to make of this book. The book is a soft tale of 20th Century Colonialism, something that's rare in almost all other books related to that topic. It felt real - lives lived and impacted but it wasn't the focus of the book - it was there, it was history and it was life, but it wasn't what the book was about. I put a quick summary from the publisher below because it doesn't flow with my review, but to me the book was about regret, longing and memory. It struck a chord because a recurring feeling the protagonist had was that he didn't know where he belonged, and he never truly felt a part of something. 

It's about finding your identity through finding the past. The book was brilliantly written, but Vassanji is a brilliant writer, one I have loved for a while. His brilliance lies in the subtleties of what he writes, the characters that he builds and where he takes the story - and above all I've always thought Vassanji is a storyteller. In all honesty I enjoyed this book more than I've enjoyed a book in a while. I broke my trashy Urban Fantasy kick to read this, and I'm incredibly glad I did. Absolutely go grab a copy, you won't regret it. It will leave you thinking and dreaming, and a feeling nostalgic for things you may have never known.

Summary: 
The Magic of Saida tells the haunting story of Kamal, a successful Canadian doctor who, in middle age and after decades in North America, decides to return to his homeland of East Africa to find his childhood sweetheart, Saida. Kamal's journey is motivated by a combination of guilt, hope, and the desire to unravel the mysteries of his childhood--mysteries compounded by the fact that Kamal is the son of an absent Indian father from a well-to-do family and a Swahili African mother of slave ancestry. Through a series of flashbacks, we watch Kamal's early years in the ancient coastal town of Kilwa, where he grows up in a world of poverty but also of poetry, sustained by his friendship with the magical Saida. This world abruptly ends when Kamal is sent away by his mother to live with his father's family in the city. There, the academically gifted boy grows up as a "dark Indian," eventually going to university and departing for Canada. Left behind to her traditional fate is Saida, now a beautiful young woman. Decades later, Kamal's guilt pulls him back to Kilwa . . . where we discovers what happened to Saida during a harrowing night of sinister rites.

Lazarus is Dead

Full Disclosure: I won this as an ARC copy from the Goodreads giveaway.  I was pretty excited to have won this one - generally I'm thrilled to win a book, but I really do love Europa as a publisher. No, they didn't tell me to say that. Yes, I actually really do think have favourite publishers.

Lazarus raising from the dead is the last, and arguably most famous of Jesus's public miracles resulting in two of the most famous Biblical quotes: "I am the resurrection and the life" and "Jesus Wept". The thing is only John mentions Lazarus - and that was written about 100 years after the other Gospels, and the problem with John, as well all know (do we all know this? My uncle used to be a Benedictine monk. Maybe this isn't common knowledge) John is... less dependable. Beard himself says it hilariously well "Mark is considered the most factually accurate. Matthew and Luke base their accounts on Mark, while John is closer to the kind of writing known today as creative non-fiction." So yes. Creative non-fiction. Historical Fact.

Whatever. Anyways. Beard's novel focus around the detail that Lazarus is described as Jesus' friend - something Jesus has few of. Why is it Lazarus' death that causes Jesus to weep? Why did the first three gospel writers omit Lazarus from their version of historical record? Beard traces the history of Jesus' friendship with Lazarus, then their more adult lives. I don't really want to get into much detail here (because you know. Spoilers) so I'm going to tell you what I think about the book.In the best possible way, I don't actually know what to make of the book. Stylistically, Beard is close to perfect, flippant but never trivial, and enough probability is added to the core of Lazarus's story to make you care about his eventual fate (or you know, one of the two options that Beard gives. Which is true? Who knows). But about the book itself I don't actually know quite what to make of it. It bounces between speculative fiction and more realistic textual analysis. It's a made up (or not) (but maybe?) (but really, too complex a debate for Goodreads) Biography of the man who was arguably Jesus' only friend.

Complicated, I know.

When you read it you'll understand.Lazarus is Dead is arguably the most unusual and original book I've read in a while and I read a lot of odd books. Call it speculative fiction, or whatever you want, and go get a copy when it comes out. It's very very much well worth a read. You'll probably put it down and be a little confused and fairly thoughtful about what is fiction, what is fact and the stories none of us know, but wish we did.

Stealing Magic

Blah Blah Blah I love Tanya Huff. This is not a secret. Wizard of the Grove is one of hands down my favourite books ever, the Blood Series is one I adore and the Keeper series this one I've read so many timees I've destroyed two copies. I haven't recommended these books to anyone who hasn't liked them. Huff is funny, smart and a fabulously entertaining writer.

Stealing magic is a collection of short stories (man I really do hate most short  stories.), really it's a double header of Huff’s comical short stories featuring Magdelene (the world's most powerful and laziest wizard) and Terazin (a top-notch thief). The book is charming, funny, and once again proves that Huff has no regard for the conventions and boundaries of genre I don't really know WHICH genre to effect. The Magdelene stories in Stealing Magic are certainly some of the few ‘high fantasy’ short works that I have ever liked. I'm pretty sure my favourite of the two are the Magdelene ones. Originally an apprentice to Adar, a castle wizard she unknowingly dismantles his most powerful spells like they don't even exist. She gains Adar's powers, just before he is turned into a pile of gray ash (oops), and decides to leave the castle. Traveling with H'sak, a demon trapped inside a mirItror, she finds that the most bucolic villages have the most unique customs concerning wizards, like welcoming them with axes or chains and manacles. Probably awkward. Basically I love that Huff gives us a lazy heroine who does not suffer from heart pangs, unhappy love, "save-the-world" complex and takes life, magic and men as something to be relaxed about. It's hot outside guys.

Water For Elephants

I wanted to love this book. I can't even tell you how much I wanted to love this book. I actually read it before the movie came out solely based on the fact I thought the cover was pretty. We all know I'm that person. I picked it up because I've always had a bit of a fascination with the circus' that toured in the early 1900's - a fascination Carnivàle cemented. So I really really wanted to love this book. So the book was seemed like it could have happened and seems to have been well researched and that's about the best I can say about it. Oh, and Wikipedia says it was written for NaNoWiMo. That's kind of cool.

That's not entirely true. It was an alright read - the idea of an orphan running away to the circus is one that is rarely a bad premise because of the inherent romance. There was a love triangle that didn't actually annoy me, and there was a very very sweet ending. The book was ok - not amazing and I think part of my... apathy towards it was because I wanted so badly to love it and I just didn't. Something was just missing.