The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

The only C.M. book, so far, that I've found rather boring. >inb4 it gits gewd rait afta ya finish eet

Of the series' books, this one hits closest home, and hardest. When I read this in, say, 2009⸺10, I just thought of Walmart, not knowing about the shitfest that is

Of the series' books, this one hits closest home, and hardest. When I read this in, say, 2009⸺10, I just thought of Walmart, not knowing about the shitfest that is

Of the series' books, this one hits closest home, and hardest. When I read this in, say, 2009⸺10, I just thought of Walmart, not knowing about the shitfest that is

Of the series' books, this one hits closest home, and hardest. When I read this in, say, 2009⸺10, I just thought of Walmart, not knowing about the shitfest that is

Just great. Information, good resources, well-cited, good interviews, good descriptions. Writing style at times on par with Palahniuk's. Sufficient.

Just great. Information, good resources, well-cited, good interviews, good descriptions. Writing style at times on par with Palahniuk's. Sufficient.

Just great. Information, good resources, well-cited, good interviews, good descriptions. Writing style at times on par with Palahniuk's. Sufficient.

Just great. Information, good resources, well-cited, good interviews, good descriptions. Writing style at times on par with Palahniuk's. Sufficient.

Just real good. Top candidate for a screenplay.

Just real good. Top candidate for a screenplay.

Just real good. Top candidate for a screenplay.

Just real good. Top candidate for a screenplay.

Just real good. Top candidate for a screenplay.

Describes in too much detail big pharma's shenanigans.

Slow. More so in a good rather than bad way. Not much happens. Good descriptions and 'feel', or 'vibes', as the zoomies and those shilling to them call it. Style over substance, to me, at least.

Dangerously based at times. Good read for modern day cities.

Dangerously based at times. Good read for modern day cities.

Dangerously based at times. Good read for modern day cities.

Dangerously based at times. Good read for modern day cities.

Dangerously based at times. Good read for modern day cities.

Dangerously based at times. Good read for modern day cities.

Stuff I figured out alone before graduation (though I'm not from the 6. century nobility). You could say, it's a good read if you've never thought and or are under 18. Also, fuck all your god shit.

Immature, self-centered, superfluous examples and stories. Yo, this ain't a bio. kys.

Great read, if you've not heard the arguments⸻I hadn't. Tad dry and theoretical, in that not all's grounded in reality. Worth a reread in .5⸺1 years' time.

Great read, if you've not heard the arguments⸻I hadn't. Tad dry and theoretical, in that not all's grounded in reality. Worth a reread in .5⸺1 years' time.

Great read, if you've not heard the arguments⸻I hadn't. Tad dry and theoretical, in that not all's grounded in reality. Worth a reread in .5⸺1 years' time.

Honest-to-fuck, (prolly CCP-sponsored/backed) chink scifi. Propaganda seeps thru, and is felt constantly. People 'act' unlike evolved creatures, or bogstandard hoomans.

Timeline mixing⸻new to me, wanna see it explored more, supposedly alt. history is the genre. Although I'd love to read about the 'bad' parasites winning, instead of the 'good' ones. Rather unsaleable, and paperweights don't pay the bills, nor are nutritious.

Nice layman's dive into the shitsea that is psychiatry and, exponentially so, the now defunct psychosurgery. Often over-detailed but great nonetheless.

Bemused, infantile rantings of an old man trying to make sense of things using communism derivatives, postmodernism, history of old dogma and authority, and often times objectively false reasoning and premises. As a fellow hooman bean, sad. As sb w/ an bigass audience- spreading unknowledge, misinformation, regardless of pseudonym, annoyingly infuriating.

Bemused, infantile rantings of an old man trying to make sense of things using communism derivatives, postmodernism, history of old dogma and authority, and often times objectively false reasoning and premises. As a fellow hooman bean, sad. As sb w/ an bigass audience- spreading unknowledge, misinformation, regardless of pseudonym, annoyingly infuriating.

Bemused, infantile rantings of an old man trying to make sense of things using communism derivatives, postmodernism, history of old dogma and authority, and often times objectively false reasoning and premises. As a fellow hooman bean, sad. As sb w/ an bigass audience- spreading unknowledge, misinformation, regardless of pseudonym, annoyingly infuriating.

Story revolved around jews... Inclined on boring you and wasting your time.

To be honest, I should've given this on more time, however, too many names, and I don't care who's who to whom in Rome. Implying, any writer or historian worth a grain of salt would write about household 'struggles', and boring shit, meanwhile⸻actual tribal genocide, burning and pillaging, but nah, weddings and brother-in-law 'n shit. Fuck this dude. Alt. history my ass.

To be honest, I should've given this on more time, however, too many names, and I don't care who's who to whom in Rome. Implying, any writer or historian worth a grain of salt would write about household 'struggles', and boring shit, meanwhile⸻actual tribal genocide, burning and pillaging, but nah, weddings and brother-in-law 'n shit. Fuck this dude. Alt. history my ass.

I'd read this, not listened through it, years ago. What had motivated me, I cannot remember. But given it took me ~1.5h of my usual speedy listening, before I caught the drift: Hey, don't I know you? The book is so devoid of meaning and content, I barely remembered anything about it. Because there was nothing to remember. Well, fuck you, Huysmans.

I'd read this, not listened through it, years ago. What had motivated me, I cannot remember. But given it took me ~1.5h of my usual speedy listening, before I caught the drift: Hey, don't I know you? The book is so devoid of meaning and content, I barely remembered anything about it. Because there was nothing to remember. Well, fuck you, Huysmans.

Braindead. Copy-pasted collage of MRE tryhards, doing absolutely nobody a favor. Should be hung publicly by the balls for being so pussywhipped. Did the abook, had all three, and listening to parts of each chapter of all– fewer than two paragraphs sufficiently summarize the reasoning, goals, visions, mindsets and everything possible. Dude's more legible than a tower of Babel sized W at the ophthalmologist.

Braindead. Copy-pasted collage of MRE tryhards, doing absolutely nobody a favor. Should be hung publicly by the balls for being so pussywhipped. Did the abook, had all three, and listening to parts of each chapter of all– fewer than two paragraphs sufficiently summarize the reasoning, goals, visions, mindsets and everything possible. Dude's more legible than a tower of Babel sized W at the ophthalmologist.

Braindead. Copy-pasted collage of MRE tryhards, doing absolutely nobody a favor. Should be hung publicly by the balls for being so pussywhipped. Did the abook, had all three, and listening to parts of each chapter of all– fewer than two paragraphs sufficiently summarize the reasoning, goals, visions, mindsets and everything possible. Dude's more legible than a tower of Babel sized W at the ophthalmologist.

Hadn't seen/been shown the economic face of matters alongside the political/cultural one, this book is a good introduction. I'll have to reread it, since I've already forgotten whether or not it makes any predictions (other the obvious ones), or just describes history- ya no, the easy part.

Hadn't seen/been shown the economic face of matters alongside the political/cultural one, this book is a good introduction. I'll have to reread it, since I've already forgotten whether or not it makes any predictions (other the obvious ones), or just describes history- ya no, the easy part.

Repetition through the book and insufficient detail lower score. Otherwise great, would make one helluva movie.

Repetition through the book and insufficient detail lower score. Otherwise great, would make one helluva movie.

Repetition through the book and insufficient detail lower score. Otherwise great, would make one helluva movie.

Repetition through the book and insufficient detail lower score. Otherwise great, would make one helluva movie.

Perhaps my first modern Middle Eastern novel. Not half bad, predominantly caused by the foreignness of (civil) war in one's own country, the not jungle|city|space|high-tech|low-tech setting, just plain ol' Toyota Hilux and domestic and foreign terrorism against all people you deem unworthy. Boring whenever the interpersonal, or rather man-woman?, or 'civil'? or merely familiar?, occurs. The rest is fine by me.

Perhaps my first modern Middle Eastern novel. Not half bad, predominantly caused by the foreignness of (civil) war in one's own country, the not jungle|city|space|high-tech|low-tech setting, just plain ol' Toyota Hilux and domestic and foreign terrorism against all people you deem unworthy. Boring whenever the interpersonal, or rather man-woman?, or 'civil'? or merely familiar?, occurs. The rest is fine by me.

Boring, bad writing, wantonly fallacious.

Written in 1940s by airplane engie, one the is first novels (I think), it's enjoyable, pacing could -be better in spots, be less foretelling overall, the last 20-30% were albeit decent, very predictable. Still, nice for a one-time read. The next novel will dictate the subsequents' lives on my drive.

The woman author massacred beforehand mediocrities in such a show of force, it whet my critique's edge such that within the ~1' I'd given each subsequent story, not a piece was left. Shit authors. To be expected of a woman, they shouldn't write about what they cannot comprehend- pick something you know, like knitting or emotional bullshit, chick lit and woman power fantasies⸻lit. 90% of audiobookbay's inventory.

Introduced to me by Alex Jones on the second (or first?) podcast with Tim Pool. 'I am a gorilla⸻murder yourself.' Yeah, but turns out it really is a book, it really does have a following, the author's made a pretty penny selling propaganda. And, what can I say, it's some of the best written propaganda out there. Rather far from the perhaps jocular suggestions the show gave impression of. I'd've not thought about it, til I saw the site...

Introduced to me by Alex Jones on the second (or first?) podcast with Tim Pool. 'I am a gorilla⸻murder yourself.' Yeah, but turns out it really is a book, it really does have a following, the author's made a pretty penny selling propaganda. And, what can I say, it's some of the best written propaganda out there. Rather far from the perhaps jocular suggestions the show gave impression of. I'd've not thought about it, til I saw the site...

Introduced to me by Alex Jones on the second (or first?) podcast with Tim Pool. 'I am a gorilla⸻murder yourself.' Yeah, but turns out it really is a book, it really does have a following, the author's made a pretty penny selling propaganda. And, what can I say, it's some of the best written propaganda out there. Rather far from the perhaps jocular suggestions the show gave impression of. I'd've not thought about it, til I saw the site...

Introduced to me by Alex Jones on the second (or first?) podcast with Tim Pool. 'I am a gorilla⸻murder yourself.' Yeah, but turns out it really is a book, it really does have a following, the author's made a pretty penny selling propaganda. And, what can I say, it's some of the best written propaganda out there. Rather far from the perhaps jocular suggestions the show gave impression of. I'd've not thought about it, til I saw the site...

Introduced to me by Alex Jones on the second (or first?) podcast with Tim Pool. 'I am a gorilla⸻murder yourself.' Yeah, but turns out it really is a book, it really does have a following, the author's made a pretty penny selling propaganda. And, what can I say, it's some of the best written propaganda out there. Rather far from the perhaps jocular suggestions the show gave impression of. I'd've not thought about it, til I saw the site...

Introduced to me by Alex Jones on the second (or first?) podcast with Tim Pool. 'I am a gorilla⸻murder yourself.' Yeah, but turns out it really is a book, it really does have a following, the author's made a pretty penny selling propaganda. And, what can I say, it's some of the best written propaganda out there. Rather far from the perhaps jocular suggestions the show gave impression of. I'd've not thought about it, til I saw the site...

Did the 13h abook of all six, dude apparently shits these babies out like a queen bee. Very little depth, likely self-published, couldn't easily find reading material to go along. He thinks in series; each introducing new element(s) or character(s), un-shy about 'gore', albeit tame and shallow compared to Chuck Palahniuk, not descriptive, yet not verbal/action-based. Immature as a writer, imo- maybe that's his niche.

Like(d) the style, but the main goon riots, has no redeeming qualities, neither do any of the non-elderly characters. Could be a manual on how to be shit human. It's like all the nigger, small American city, actually probably all ethnicities given there're several follow-up novels, fit into their stereotypes, the ones prescribing bad qualities, mostly. Author blacklisted.

Fuckin' A. My kinda of kino. Second read.

Rather condescending writing, catering to either bigger audience under publisher pressure, or actual malice, albeit the rich dad was supposedly the bad guy. Platitudes, garnished with too-detailed-to-be-real example from 'real life'. Nothing you can't figure out yourself before hitting 18, practicing it is another matter- and that's nothing to do with books. Also, contains falsehoods, flawed argumentation, and false premises. Of zero intellectual worth to >90-IQlets.

Rather condescending writing, catering to either bigger audience under publisher pressure, or actual malice, albeit the rich dad was supposedly the bad guy. Platitudes, garnished with too-detailed-to-be-real example from 'real life'. Nothing you can't figure out yourself before hitting 18, practicing it is another matter- and that's nothing to do with books. Also, contains falsehoods, flawed argumentation, and false premises. Of zero intellectual worth to >90-IQlets.

Abook, actually greatly done. Lovely writing, humorous and witty, some new words for myself, very believable and consistent. Although I know criticisms of his main work, s.h., perhaps from seasoned, hard-boiled crime novelists and the like, but this, the first of 5 novels w/ prof. challenger, essentially a series, this books seems like an excellent package.

Nothing within (so far) suggests Nobel-prize-worthiness. Occurs in modern day Nowheresville, Turkey with its current issues. Boring though, and slow to boot. These 30% I've read could've'n a 1⸺2 paragraphs, action-wise, aaand the description or narration isn't worth my time.

Second book of Doyle's Prof. Challenger series. Abook again, and this time I didn't feel like opening up the text, inferior to the preceding one- the ending is heralded before act one is half done. Appreciable epilogue though- some discussion around the topic of ether and additional anti-nuc.war propaganda story.

If you've seen his documentaries, his mannerisms, the way he conducts himself, the question he asks and how he goes about everything, you've read some this book, at least, everything up to his 20s and career start in the US. Smart guy, but indoctrinated leftie in need of subjugation to harsh truths.

Collection of short stories but in a unprecedented fashion, I liked each and every one. Either I've only ever had bad luck starting stories, or the stories just are original in concepts, content, and feature good writing. Glad I gave the guy a shot, I'm dl'ing his other works hoping quality wasn't sacrificed for depth and longitude.

Based and pilled. Has decent advice and ideas to consider for author and reader alike.

Based and pilled. Has decent advice and ideas to consider for author and reader alike.

Based and pilled. Has decent advice and ideas to consider for author and reader alike.

Based and pilled. Has decent advice and ideas to consider for author and reader alike.

Based and pilled. Has decent advice and ideas to consider for author and reader alike.

Based and pilled. Has decent advice and ideas to consider for author and reader alike.

Gives a decent to great view, indirectly for the most, into how a good and mature mind goes about tackling a strong foe. David vs. Goliath. However, here Goliath lacks his natural strength, instead hiding behind a system disallowing people without massive amounts of money to play. The first amendment, and freedom of '''press''', both in from the 2000s to early 2020s so very often misused, that lawyers specialize in this overlitigated law. Whereas before companies strove to shut up the the press, who then more frequently sided with the common folk and the average joe, currently things are exactly backasswards. Well, with Project Veritas' BIGASS cases against the jew jork times and cnn, soon the titanic Gawker case might be joined by two other leviathans in case law.

Gives a decent to great view, indirectly for the most, into how a good and mature mind goes about tackling a strong foe. David vs. Goliath. However, here Goliath lacks his natural strength, instead hiding behind a system disallowing people without massive amounts of money to play. The first amendment, and freedom of '''press''', both in from the 2000s to early 2020s so very often misused, that lawyers specialize in this overlitigated law. Whereas before companies strove to shut up the the press, who then more frequently sided with the common folk and the average joe, currently things are exactly backasswards. Well, with Project Veritas' BIGASS cases against the jew jork times and cnn, soon the titanic Gawker case might be joined by two other leviathans in case law.

Gives a decent to great view, indirectly for the most, into how a good and mature mind goes about tackling a strong foe. David vs. Goliath. However, here Goliath lacks his natural strength, instead hiding behind a system disallowing people without massive amounts of money to play. The first amendment, and freedom of '''press''', both in from the 2000s to early 2020s so very often misused, that lawyers specialize in this overlitigated law. Whereas before companies strove to shut up the the press, who then more frequently sided with the common folk and the average joe, currently things are exactly backasswards. Well, with Project Veritas' BIGASS cases against the jew jork times and cnn, soon the titanic Gawker case might be joined by two other leviathans in case law.

Gives a decent to great view, indirectly for the most, into how a good and mature mind goes about tackling a strong foe. David vs. Goliath. However, here Goliath lacks his natural strength, instead hiding behind a system disallowing people without massive amounts of money to play. The first amendment, and freedom of '''press''', both in from the 2000s to early 2020s so very often misused, that lawyers specialize in this overlitigated law. Whereas before companies strove to shut up the the press, who then more frequently sided with the common folk and the average joe, currently things are exactly backasswards. Well, with Project Veritas' BIGASS cases against the jew jork times and cnn, soon the titanic Gawker case might be joined by two other leviathans in case law.

Kinda hard to follow, too many characters, some too zany, or predictable in a stereotypical fashion. Writing from the future, serves me right for picking up a long-running series. Dude's wringing it dry as bone. I'll give the firstborn a try in due time.

Kinda hard to follow, too many characters, some too zany, or predictable in a stereotypical fashion. Writing from the future, serves me right for picking up a long-running series. Dude's wringing it dry as bone. I'll give the firstborn a try in due time.

Kinda hard to follow, too many characters, some too zany, or predictable in a stereotypical fashion. Writing from the future, serves me right for picking up a long-running series. Dude's wringing it dry as bone. I'll give the firstborn a try in due time.

Kinda hard to follow, too many characters, some too zany, or predictable in a stereotypical fashion. Writing from the future, serves me right for picking up a long-running series. Dude's wringing it dry as bone. I'll give the firstborn a try in due time.

I do love a time-traveling novel that's also closed off, that loops into itself, explaining more through different timelines, sets of eyes and eyes. This one also has nice ideas about the American dream, as if it were something physical, making myth out of the founding fathers' creation. If it'd employed better writing, less foreseeable or predictable- I'm always a paragraph ahead of where I'm at-, it could've been a full checkmark.

The book gets better, and better, and better. Maybe the hostility from 'Fortunately the Milk' has withered (maybe I should give it another go..?). It weaves together strands from various cultures, geographies, and times into an American story told from the settler on the continent far before the country's founding. Like Under the Volcano, it has a dreamlike, continuous, or stream-of-consciousness-like quality that I quite fancy, and similarly simultaneously find it hard to put down, and myself unwilling to go faster to avoid completion, to prolong virginal self-indulgences.

The stream of consciousness in this is gorgeous, it never stops. Even more so than Under the Volcano maybe. The matter of fact delivery, the similarities with the real world both make this extremely enjoyable and re-analyzable.

Great body horror short stories. That is all.

Nice to hear what some had long been suspecting, me too albeit I've didn't care as much, but was nonetheless fascinated about the length people would and do go to for money and or power. Just power, actually, all things that be exchanged for in the book can be seen as power within some domain⸻financial, political, personal, etc. Personally, my first big insight into media manipulation, deception, and play on all team for gain. What ticked me off that he's a giant fucking jew, is how his unscrupulousness and unruefulness. That he sees James O'Keefe is fraudulent⸻this was most damning. He becomes the exact same person he claims to be short- and long-conning, the misinformed reader, the blogger. Showing no evidence, no sources, nothing but spurious claims, (same could be said about handing various other American '''news''' outlets compliments such as 'credible'). He's is no better than these people. And he's a long, long walk from doing anything of worth.

Auto-fellatory.

Written in England during the 80s when cheap, explicit gore was all the rage (was it any good tho?), this gentleman's collection of what he call 'dark fantasy', offers a jab back. Were it you cup of tea, you might call it decisive blow, but the 7 first stories within did not grasp me. Dark or creepy, or spooky, they are not. Quaint, sure. Tolerable, even not too boring or predictable, just not enough happening to warrant the time currently with so much on the reading table.

Hard to believe this guy's a comedian, because this books is a good joke you can hear once, and it's good. And then it's repeated til the second book cover. It functions more like a friend one know well, whose stories all bare a certain tinge, nuance, flavor, that you enjoy, but recognize from afar and whose end you can spell out.

Too mild. More historical through a child's eyes, than good fiction. Too sentimental, or human, or what would be a better way of putting? Normal, predictable? Were the war, world, characters all fictional, I'd've not cared and dropped it before the hour-mark.

Too mild. More historical through a child's eyes, than good fiction. Too sentimental, or human, or what would be a better way of putting? Normal, predictable? Were the war, world, characters all fictional, I'd've not cared and dropped it before the hour-mark.

I really could not bring myself to caring about anybody or anything within the first 1.5h of the audiobook. It's boring and bland.

I really could not bring myself to caring about anybody or anything within the first 1.5h of the audiobook. It's boring and bland.

If you were paid attention at the beginning, you'd know how it ends. I hate it when true crime novels-, I had to, had to look back to see who that other fucking author was who did this-, IT WAS JOHN GLATT; FUCK YOU, JOHN GLATT!⸻, He did this with

From the foreword already I'm hooked by the irrelevant to the book backstory of the author. From the first paragraph, it's a style of writing that regales me. Witty, good storytelling. This text is phonetically thickens speech with nearly everything embedded in an accent⸻here, that of New Orleans, Louisiana. Understandable unlike 1996's Trainspotting movie, without ever being/feeling cryptic (to me), it provides style, an aesthetically enjoyable stuffing to the plot. All characters are memorable, distinct, colorful, but not unbelievable.
Very fucking based.

Now, this passage, albeit written in the 80s, demonstrates the type of thinking, at least superficially, present among modern-day lefties. Although satirical, somehow the author had had enough either fore- or insight, or had already witness this in his time. The ideas should have already taken root in American higher education then.

...As the magnificence and originality of my worldview became explicit through conversation, the Minkoff minx began attacking me on all levels, even kicking me under the table rather vigorously at one point. I both fascinated and confused her; in short, I was too much for her. The parochialism of the ghettos of Gotham had not prepared her for the uniqueness of Your Working Boy. Myrna, you see, believed that all humans living south and west of the Hudson River were illiterate cowboys or⸻even worse⸻White Protestants, a class of humans who as a group specialized in ignorance, cruelty, and torture. (I don't wish to especially defend White Protestants; I am not too fond of them myself.) Soon Myrna's brutal social manner had driven my courtiers from the table, and we were left alone, all cold coffee and hot words. When I failed to agree with her braying and babbling, she told me that I was obviously anti-Semitic. Her logic was a combination of half-truths and clichés, her worldview a compound of misconceptions deriving from a history of our nation as written from the perspective of a subway tunnel. She dug into her large black valise and assaulted me (almost literally) with greasy copies of Men and Masses and Now! and Broken Barricades and Surge and Revulsion and various manifestos and pamphlets pertaining to organizations of which she was a most active member: Students for Liberty, Youth for Sex, The Black Muslims, Friends of Latvia, Children for Miscegenation, The White Citizens' Councils.

I like to laugh from a non-human perspective, because from a human one, it's just sad, disappoint, suboptimal, grotesque. I'd like to laugh knowing I've never stated or opined (only to not be heard or regarded) and turned out wrong. I'd like to, but I'd rather be wrong and have humanity be better for it, others, the ones I interact with. But no. I'm right, but for my own sake, and I mourn for society every waking moment in the presence of others.
ANOTHER ONE:

'Maybe your boy went to school too long,' Mr. Robichaux advised. 'They got plenty communiss in colleges.'

..Anyways, it's a great read, it's reread-worthy. No wonder it's a cult classic of southern US.

From the foreword already I'm hooked by the irrelevant to the book backstory of the author. From the first paragraph, it's a style of writing that regales me. Witty, good storytelling. This text is phonetically thickens speech with nearly everything embedded in an accent⸻here, that of New Orleans, Louisiana. Understandable unlike 1996's Trainspotting movie, without ever being/feeling cryptic (to me), it provides style, an aesthetically enjoyable stuffing to the plot. All characters are memorable, distinct, colorful, but not unbelievable.
Very fucking based.

Now, this passage, albeit written in the 80s, demonstrates the type of thinking, at least superficially, present among modern-day lefties. Although satirical, somehow the author had had enough either fore- or insight, or had already witness this in his time. The ideas should have already taken root in American higher education then.

...As the magnificence and originality of my worldview became explicit through conversation, the Minkoff minx began attacking me on all levels, even kicking me under the table rather vigorously at one point. I both fascinated and confused her; in short, I was too much for her. The parochialism of the ghettos of Gotham had not prepared her for the uniqueness of Your Working Boy. Myrna, you see, believed that all humans living south and west of the Hudson River were illiterate cowboys or⸻even worse⸻White Protestants, a class of humans who as a group specialized in ignorance, cruelty, and torture. (I don't wish to especially defend White Protestants; I am not too fond of them myself.) Soon Myrna's brutal social manner had driven my courtiers from the table, and we were left alone, all cold coffee and hot words. When I failed to agree with her braying and babbling, she told me that I was obviously anti-Semitic. Her logic was a combination of half-truths and clichés, her worldview a compound of misconceptions deriving from a history of our nation as written from the perspective of a subway tunnel. She dug into her large black valise and assaulted me (almost literally) with greasy copies of Men and Masses and Now! and Broken Barricades and Surge and Revulsion and various manifestos and pamphlets pertaining to organizations of which she was a most active member: Students for Liberty, Youth for Sex, The Black Muslims, Friends of Latvia, Children for Miscegenation, The White Citizens' Councils.

I like to laugh from a non-human perspective, because from a human one, it's just sad, disappoint, suboptimal, grotesque. I'd like to laugh knowing I've never stated or opined (only to not be heard or regarded) and turned out wrong. I'd like to, but I'd rather be wrong and have humanity be better for it, others, the ones I interact with. But no. I'm right, but for my own sake, and I mourn for society every waking moment in the presence of others.
ANOTHER ONE:

'Maybe your boy went to school too long,' Mr. Robichaux advised. 'They got plenty communiss in colleges.'

..Anyways, it's a great read, it's reread-worthy. No wonder it's a cult classic of southern US.

Decent concept and dull storytelling at the (audiobook's) length of 16h, or ~2e5 words⸻uh, yeah, nah, cunt, I'm good. Not fucking waiting for more sub-par plot delivery. MNEEEEXT!

No fucking clue what the fuck is supposed to be happening. With zero on-boarding, hearing strange names (jacobarian..?), etc. is off-putting. I thought alt. history was supposed to deal with real historical things, not made up ones. Regardless, without the text in front of me⸻and I sure as shit wasn't giving it a chance with that delivery⸻, big no. NEXT!

First story had this nice passage:

I rushed into the nearest newsstand and gathered up as much as I could find on the petroleum crisis and the nuclear energy hazard. I'd just decided to plane ticket for New York. 'Helluva world we live in, huh?' The proprietor was a thin black man with bad teeth and an obvious wig. I nodded, fishing in my jeans for change, anxious to find a park bench, where I could submerge myself in hard evidence of the human near-dystopia we live in. 'But it could be worse, huh?' 'That's right', I said. 'Or even worse, it could be perfect.'

That aside, these stories bore. The editor, himself a famed author in this direction, is enthralled however. I can't reconcile what kind of a person would actually find these monotonous, drab, snoozefests, i.e., cyberpunk-, interesting. Or anything positive really. Visionary in predicting future technologies and or ideas⸻sure. Entertaining, enjoyable, pleasant⸻no.

First story had this nice passage:

I rushed into the nearest newsstand and gathered up as much as I could find on the petroleum crisis and the nuclear energy hazard. I'd just decided to plane ticket for New York. 'Helluva world we live in, huh?' The proprietor was a thin black man with bad teeth and an obvious wig. I nodded, fishing in my jeans for change, anxious to find a park bench, where I could submerge myself in hard evidence of the human near-dystopia we live in. 'But it could be worse, huh?' 'That's right', I said. 'Or even worse, it could be perfect.'

That aside, these stories bore. The editor, himself a famed author in this direction, is enthralled however. I can't reconcile what kind of a person would actually find these monotonous, drab, snoozefests, i.e., cyberpunk-, interesting. Or anything positive really. Visionary in predicting future technologies and or ideas⸻sure. Entertaining, enjoyable, pleasant⸻no.

First story had this nice passage:

I rushed into the nearest newsstand and gathered up as much as I could find on the petroleum crisis and the nuclear energy hazard. I'd just decided to plane ticket for New York. 'Helluva world we live in, huh?' The proprietor was a thin black man with bad teeth and an obvious wig. I nodded, fishing in my jeans for change, anxious to find a park bench, where I could submerge myself in hard evidence of the human near-dystopia we live in. 'But it could be worse, huh?' 'That's right', I said. 'Or even worse, it could be perfect.'

That aside, these stories bore. The editor, himself a famed author in this direction, is enthralled however. I can't reconcile what kind of a person would actually find these monotonous, drab, snoozefests, i.e., cyberpunk-, interesting. Or anything positive really. Visionary in predicting future technologies and or ideas⸻sure. Entertaining, enjoyable, pleasant⸻no.

Third novel of Cutter I've read. This one, like

Third novel of Cutter I've read. This one, like

Often tries for dry delivery, but fails more often than not. The feel, or texture, the thought patterns are somehow wrong. Not uncanny, they just don't make sense. Maybe it's trying for gore/horror comedy..? However, nice little passage somewhat make up for it:

Self-awareness really doesn't mean shit though. It is, in fact, little more than psychological masturbation, and has about the same net worth as a wad of semen in a handful of crumpled tissues. No cockroach ever desired not to be a cockroach just because it knew it was a cockroach. ... The two living girls I've been with never came at all, and my own climax was nothing memorable. The faint pleasure paling in comparison to the ecstasy I feel when I ejaculate into a dead woman. The dead have no expectations. There's no pressure for you to make them feel anything. I copulate with corpses largely because it is all about me. About the meeting of my needs.

Note⸻this is the most modern-day, brainwashed, cock-carousel, pseudo-feminist woman statement. Men, if they feel like it, take, they don't comment about it, they don't write in their journal, blog, diary, talk to their friend about it and lead month-long inane discussions.

... Shooting thousands of doomed children in the general direction of her dead and useless ovaries. Another benefit of my little fetish⸻no condom, no problem. I may very well be the most fertile man on the planet, but all my lovers are equipped with the best birth control the world can offer.

Halfway though, I'd say the biggest problem is characters are shallowly explored. Again, an attempt is made at dry delivery, but it comes off as... off. A lot more side-points, -experiences could've been explored similar to to Victor in

A cocktail of 1 part interesting, 1 part bland, and 1 part sad, frustrating and disappointing. I've only ever watched one Asa scene, I'm not into anal, or (pseudo-)rough stuff, or any of her strong parts. The surgery make her look fake, alien, uncanny, definitely all south of neutral, let alone arousing. Regardless, her name is recognizable and one can hear this or that over the years about her, the industry, specific other performers. So I was expecting to hear some depressing shit of 2. gen American immigrant youths squandering opportunity, being shitheads, and horrible people. Correct-o. I expected some cool, or interesting stories though. I know it's a profession like any other, but when you work with people you get to do more getting to know, more locations, more scenarios, idunno. Likely, this is her very first long-form text. Says she wanted to be a writer before becoming an addict and even more of whore. The work is stereotypical of a woman⸻{ aforementioned adjectives }; and either her nib has many miles more of paper to cover before something decent emerges, or, and this is subjective, I don't like autobiographical shit, esp. female. The repetition become more frequent, and predictability increments lockstep. After the first third, you can close the book content to not waste any more of your time.

A cocktail of 1 part interesting, 1 part bland, and 1 part sad, frustrating and disappointing. I've only ever watched one Asa scene, I'm not into anal, or (pseudo-)rough stuff, or any of her strong parts. The surgery make her look fake, alien, uncanny, definitely all south of neutral, let alone arousing. Regardless, her name is recognizable and one can hear this or that over the years about her, the industry, specific other performers. So I was expecting to hear some depressing shit of 2. gen American immigrant youths squandering opportunity, being shitheads, and horrible people. Correct-o. I expected some cool, or interesting stories though. I know it's a profession like any other, but when you work with people you get to do more getting to know, more locations, more scenarios, idunno. Likely, this is her very first long-form text. Says she wanted to be a writer before becoming an addict and even more of whore. The work is stereotypical of a woman⸻{ aforementioned adjectives }; and either her nib has many miles more of paper to cover before something decent emerges, or, and this is subjective, I don't like autobiographical shit, esp. female. The repetition become more frequent, and predictability increments lockstep. After the first third, you can close the book content to not waste any more of your time.

A cocktail of 1 part interesting, 1 part bland, and 1 part sad, frustrating and disappointing. I've only ever watched one Asa scene, I'm not into anal, or (pseudo-)rough stuff, or any of her strong parts. The surgery make her look fake, alien, uncanny, definitely all south of neutral, let alone arousing. Regardless, her name is recognizable and one can hear this or that over the years about her, the industry, specific other performers. So I was expecting to hear some depressing shit of 2. gen American immigrant youths squandering opportunity, being shitheads, and horrible people. Correct-o. I expected some cool, or interesting stories though. I know it's a profession like any other, but when you work with people you get to do more getting to know, more locations, more scenarios, idunno. Likely, this is her very first long-form text. Says she wanted to be a writer before becoming an addict and even more of whore. The work is stereotypical of a woman⸻{ aforementioned adjectives }; and either her nib has many miles more of paper to cover before something decent emerges, or, and this is subjective, I don't like autobiographical shit, esp. female. The repetition become more frequent, and predictability increments lockstep. After the first third, you can close the book content to not waste any more of your time.

For a horror/thriller/suspense novel⸻it's shit. I should've trusted my instinct, my disgust, revulsion at Stephen King's endorsement of this mediocre trash. Cut out three quarters, make it punchy, do something, for fuck's sake. Reads more like a a stereotypical midlife crisis⸻flirtation at work, bumps in marriage, trouble with family/heritage, increasing paranoia about meaningless, irrelevant shit. Pace is frozen solid compared to where it should be. And the reader? Bored, gets a middle finger. NEXT!

For a horror/thriller/suspense novel⸻it's shit. I should've trusted my instinct, my disgust, revulsion at Stephen King's endorsement of this mediocre trash. Cut out three quarters, make it punchy, do something, for fuck's sake. Reads more like a a stereotypical midlife crisis⸻flirtation at work, bumps in marriage, trouble with family/heritage, increasing paranoia about meaningless, irrelevant shit. Pace is frozen solid compared to where it should be. And the reader? Bored, gets a middle finger. NEXT!

Another boring Jap novel. Most characters are predictable. Up to the quarter that I'd reached, unexpected only was the main release in act 1. Beginning pages are way to rocky. Actual ground is missing, not 'rocky', if I were to continue with a metaphor of a vehicle driving you to the all the essential info of act 1. Also, way too many characters and plot points or lines introduced in too short a time span. I'm not decoding bad writing. Even when I eventually caught up to roughly what was happening, it's still falls flat. I could wait for 'the good stuff', or actually get a good book.

My kinda book, about highly intelligent, prophetic, endeavor-ous (coining this til a sub swims up), who were right about almost everything, and whom nobody listened to regarding matter of most import.

Today, one gets single-sentence, single-word, or, worst of all, emoji replies. Back then, good-faith discussion in long form, in 20-page letters was normal. Thought was expanded n-fold, refined m-fold both written and oral. Somewhere in the technological frenzy, probably since the invention of the telegraph (paraphrasing quote from another book): 'What the fuck does Maine care about Missouri?'. This book is also my first encounter with founders' texts. I do have The Federalist Papers, but the amount of monographs, epistles, speeches given by these four dudes astounds. I've ever only twice spoken in front of people, both failing either time from being under-prepared, and nervous (having failed the first time many years ago). My dude Hamilton gives out five-hour speeches, ffs.

I find the 4-four showcasing of only the currently examined founder's statements lamentable, albeit, it's supposed to be about their hesitancy, despondency, worry, not their correspondences.

My kinda book, about highly intelligent, prophetic, endeavor-ous (coining this til a sub swims up), who were right about almost everything, and whom nobody listened to regarding matter of most import.

Today, one gets single-sentence, single-word, or, worst of all, emoji replies. Back then, good-faith discussion in long form, in 20-page letters was normal. Thought was expanded n-fold, refined m-fold both written and oral. Somewhere in the technological frenzy, probably since the invention of the telegraph (paraphrasing quote from another book): 'What the fuck does Maine care about Missouri?'. This book is also my first encounter with founders' texts. I do have The Federalist Papers, but the amount of monographs, epistles, speeches given by these four dudes astounds. I've ever only twice spoken in front of people, both failing either time from being under-prepared, and nervous (having failed the first time many years ago). My dude Hamilton gives out five-hour speeches, ffs.

I find the 4-four showcasing of only the currently examined founder's statements lamentable, albeit, it's supposed to be about their hesitancy, despondency, worry, not their correspondences.

My kinda book, about highly intelligent, prophetic, endeavor-ous (coining this til a sub swims up), who were right about almost everything, and whom nobody listened to regarding matter of most import.

Today, one gets single-sentence, single-word, or, worst of all, emoji replies. Back then, good-faith discussion in long form, in 20-page letters was normal. Thought was expanded n-fold, refined m-fold both written and oral. Somewhere in the technological frenzy, probably since the invention of the telegraph (paraphrasing quote from another book): 'What the fuck does Maine care about Missouri?'. This book is also my first encounter with founders' texts. I do have The Federalist Papers, but the amount of monographs, epistles, speeches given by these four dudes astounds. I've ever only twice spoken in front of people, both failing either time from being under-prepared, and nervous (having failed the first time many years ago). My dude Hamilton gives out five-hour speeches, ffs.

I find the 4-four showcasing of only the currently examined founder's statements lamentable, albeit, it's supposed to be about their hesitancy, despondency, worry, not their correspondences.

Nice critique and analysis of environmental problems and problems with environmentalists. Although it does get rather floaty after ~2/3, and becoming increasing irrational, petulant, and the type of person she was hating on beforehand.

Dangerously red-pilled.
Meticulous explanation of connections between key players in various high-level fields⸻us news, us politics, china, among others. The author does not know the actual nature of the virus, but at least he skirts around the issue, not paying it more than it's due. Little-to-no else was blatantly false.

For children, I'd hope, I think?, otherwise unfunny and or annoying.

Alright-y, months later and in a better mood, I relistened and reread. It's actually quite nice for a short story, family friendly too.

For children, I'd hope, I think?, otherwise unfunny and or annoying.

Alright-y, months later and in a better mood, I relistened and reread. It's actually quite nice for a short story, family friendly too.

For children, I'd hope, I think?, otherwise unfunny and or annoying.

Alright-y, months later and in a better mood, I relistened and reread. It's actually quite nice for a short story, family friendly too.

Reading this at first, I was struck by new-ness of the ideas, or narrative presented. I looking up ol' Rodney in audiobookbay to find that, lo and and behold, dude writes exclusively about religion. Fine, maybe the complete selection elucidates the connection with religion⸻and it does. A journalist turned sociologist, currently some distinguished prof. of it at some uni or religion-oriented institute, he writes about rel. diverse topics, mostly human ones regarding history, Christianity, etc.: from wiki 'Stark has written over 30 books, including The Rise of Christianity (1996), and more than 140 scholarly articles on subjects as diverse as prejudice, crime, suicide, and city life in ancient Rome.'

My only gripe is regarding assumptions for the emergence of 'science' in the Middle Ages being due to Christianity, Catholicism specifically. I grant you, no other society with or without religion succeeded in isolation to getting to it. But, just because I wore a mauve sweater today and it didn't rain on me, doesn't mean that: it didn't rain elsewhere, it would have rained on me had the material or color of the sweater been different, or the article, or had I gone bare-chested. An affirmative conclusion from a negative premise. It wouldn't be prudent, nor expedient, to takes thousands of modern-day hunter-gatherers, and observe them enough time in similar enough conditions to allow for a development of religions, and a progression of that development⸻as he points out, Christianity is the (perhaps?) only orthodox (i.e., based on correct interpretation/opining) religion, whereas others are orthoprax (i.e., based on correct execution of rites and practices): Judaism, Islam, Taoism, and even pseudo-religions such as whatever passes for Marxism these days. It is logically fallacious to assert that it is the sole contribution of Christianity. That it played a big role, however, crucial even, is substantiated sufficiently.

The book is consistent through and through, covers history from around the 8th to the 18th century without unnecessary jumps; topics are chaptered well, and these in turn⸻well sectioned.

Assuming his references are in check (and I've no reason to assume they're not), this book deprives wanton 'debunkers' and agenda-pushers, most of which he himself points to whenever relevant. Well written, presented. I will also check out some of the titles considered heavily biased, and demonstrably false by ol' Rodney 'ere.

Reading this at first, I was struck by new-ness of the ideas, or narrative presented. I looking up ol' Rodney in audiobookbay to find that, lo and and behold, dude writes exclusively about religion. Fine, maybe the complete selection elucidates the connection with religion⸻and it does. A journalist turned sociologist, currently some distinguished prof. of it at some uni or religion-oriented institute, he writes about rel. diverse topics, mostly human ones regarding history, Christianity, etc.: from wiki 'Stark has written over 30 books, including The Rise of Christianity (1996), and more than 140 scholarly articles on subjects as diverse as prejudice, crime, suicide, and city life in ancient Rome.'

My only gripe is regarding assumptions for the emergence of 'science' in the Middle Ages being due to Christianity, Catholicism specifically. I grant you, no other society with or without religion succeeded in isolation to getting to it. But, just because I wore a mauve sweater today and it didn't rain on me, doesn't mean that: it didn't rain elsewhere, it would have rained on me had the material or color of the sweater been different, or the article, or had I gone bare-chested. An affirmative conclusion from a negative premise. It wouldn't be prudent, nor expedient, to takes thousands of modern-day hunter-gatherers, and observe them enough time in similar enough conditions to allow for a development of religions, and a progression of that development⸻as he points out, Christianity is the (perhaps?) only orthodox (i.e., based on correct interpretation/opining) religion, whereas others are orthoprax (i.e., based on correct execution of rites and practices): Judaism, Islam, Taoism, and even pseudo-religions such as whatever passes for Marxism these days. It is logically fallacious to assert that it is the sole contribution of Christianity. That it played a big role, however, crucial even, is substantiated sufficiently.

The book is consistent through and through, covers history from around the 8th to the 18th century without unnecessary jumps; topics are chaptered well, and these in turn⸻well sectioned.

Assuming his references are in check (and I've no reason to assume they're not), this book deprives wanton 'debunkers' and agenda-pushers, most of which he himself points to whenever relevant. Well written, presented. I will also check out some of the titles considered heavily biased, and demonstrably false by ol' Rodney 'ere.

I'm not layperson when it comes to medicine, but I'm also no ER doc. This is mediocre. Almost all of these questions are easily answerable from an old corpus of scientific knowledge, or from thinking rationally about them, scientific method, bitch. What a waste of time. Speaking of time, I've'n thrusted longer religious sect pamphlets than this. A writer's and doctor's combined effort results in a pop-sci Q&A and old-wives-tales 'debunking'/explaining. Any search-savvy teen, non-idiotic teen could get to these answers sans the faux entertainment.

I'm not layperson when it comes to medicine, but I'm also no ER doc. This is mediocre. Almost all of these questions are easily answerable from an old corpus of scientific knowledge, or from thinking rationally about them, scientific method, bitch. What a waste of time. Speaking of time, I've'n thrusted longer religious sect pamphlets than this. A writer's and doctor's combined effort results in a pop-sci Q&A and old-wives-tales 'debunking'/explaining. Any search-savvy teen, non-idiotic teen could get to these answers sans the faux entertainment.

I'm not layperson when it comes to medicine, but I'm also no ER doc. This is mediocre. Almost all of these questions are easily answerable from an old corpus of scientific knowledge, or from thinking rationally about them, scientific method, bitch. What a waste of time. Speaking of time, I've'n thrusted longer religious sect pamphlets than this. A writer's and doctor's combined effort results in a pop-sci Q&A and old-wives-tales 'debunking'/explaining. Any search-savvy teen, non-idiotic teen could get to these answers sans the faux entertainment.

Fucking snoozefest, atrocious writing style. At least put the good stuff up front, for fuck's sake. Waste of time.

Faux condescension, the wording of every fucking sentence, annoys to the bone. Nothing of worth is said. This is below trash. And so is Dawkins regardless of all his previous work.

T.R.A.S.H.

One of these days, I'm gonna stop considering all self-help books altogether, same as anything by a woman, or in a series. And this guy's supposed to be fucking smart? Smart in extracting money from trash humans stupid enough to forfeit their money for this garbage. NEEEEEEEEEXT!!

Supposed psychological thriller writer. Yeah, and I'm a tram. I gave it, like, 5 chances, and it never fails to disappoint. Regarding the rating, as they say, if it walks like a duck, and talks a duck...

Supposed psychological thriller writer. Yeah, and I'm a tram. I gave it, like, 5 chances, and it never fails to disappoint. Regarding the rating, as they say, if it walks like a duck, and talks a duck...

The first quarter-to-third (or -half) of this book is extremely weak compared to Kahneman's other books, if I recall correctly (I'm not rereading that shit, yo.). To anyone who's had a statistics class, paid attention, and done the work, this is wholly superfluous. Is the intended audience really stupid people? Uneducated people incapable of autonomous thought? Children..? Similar applies to the quotes appended to every chapter. These often occur within paragraphs of their 'source', and if you've working memory at all, you quotes to half a page back are pure filler. ... which is my next gripe. So far, character count can but cut by half without loss of information or narrative flow.

Next gripe: unnecessary terminology⸻noise this, noise that⸻, and obfuscation of already perfectly clear concepts from statistics by changing established terms can or does confuse anybody who's ever dealt with them.

Lastly, there's is a slight not full woke, but clearly leftie-drone drag about race and sex that continues reappearing. My stupid nigga, stereotypes exist for very good reasons: because they are very often, on the whole, true or truisms. And whatever cards one's dealt at the start of life, one should blame, whine, and finger-point, but do whatever's in one's capabilities. Not all X arguments are platitudes as much as stereotypes, but therein you see the double standards (again). Also uses female pronouns for general and neuter cases (you, one, person)⸻I fucking hate this shit so fucking much.

Also fuck you stupid cunts for referred to the 'covid' thing as a pandemic, something objectively false by definitions of that word up to 2020, when the shills at WHO changed it.

Hm, anyway, it also struck me finally, namely that I'm a superforecaster (kinda?):

What makes superforecasters so good? Consistent with our argument in chapter 18, we could reasonably speculate that they are unusually intelligent. That speculation is not wrong. On GMA tests, the superforecasters do better than the average volunteer in the Good Judgment Project (and the average volunteer is significantly above the national average). But the difference isn't all that large, and many volunteers who do extremely well on intelligence tests do not qualify as superforecasters. Apart from general intelligence, we could reasonably expect that superforecasters are unusually good with numbers. And they are. But their real advantage is not their talent at math; it is their ease in thinking analytically and probabilistically. Consider superforecasters' willingness and ability to structure and disaggregate problems. Rather than form a holistic judgment about a big geopolitical question (whether a nation will leave the European Union, whether a war will break out in a particular place, whether a public official will be assassinated), they break it up into its component parts. They ask, “What would it take for the answer to be yes? What would it take for the answer to be no?” Instead of offering a gut feeling or some kind of global hunch, they ask and try to answer an assortment of subsidiary questions. Superforecasters also excel at taking the outside view, and they care a lot about base rates. As explained for the Gambardi problem in chapter 13, before you focus on the specifics of Gambardi's profile, it helps to know the probability that the average CEO will be fired or quit in the next two years. Superforecasters systematically look for base rates. Asked whether the next year will bring an armed clash between China and Vietnam over a border dispute, superforecasters do not focus only or immediately on whether China and Vietnam are getting along right now. They might have an intuition about this, in light of the news and analysis they have read. But they know that their intuition about one event is generally not a good guide. Instead they start by looking for a base rate: they ask how often past border disputes have escalated into armed clashes. If such clashes are rare, superforecasters will begin by incorporating that fact and only then turn to the details of the China–Vietnam situation. In short, what distinguishes the superforecasters isn't their sheer intelligence; it's how they released in a final version but that is endlessly used, analyzed, and improved. Tetlock finds that “the strongest predictor of rising into the ranks of superforecasters is perpetual beta, the degree to which one is committed to belief updating and self-improvement.” As he puts it, “What makes them so good is less what they are than what they do⸻the hard work of research, the careful thought and self-criticism, the gathering and synthesizing of other perspectives, the granular judgments and relentless updating.” They like a particular cycle of thinking: “try, fail, analyze, adjust, try again.”

To give the book its due: it is a nice reminder of what one must always keep in mind. Albeit, having a paper copy of

Same old garbage. Predictable, annoying, platitudinous, common-sense, unhelpful, waste of time. I won't again consider or download a self-help book. I'll rapid-fire go through every single one I've saved, just to reduce space and be content. Deletion s-s-s-satisfiessss.

Same old garbage. Predictable, annoying, platitudinous, common-sense, unhelpful, waste of time. I won't again consider or download a self-help book. I'll rapid-fire go through every single one I've saved, just to reduce space and be content. Deletion s-s-s-satisfiessss.

Same old garbage. Predictable, annoying, platitudinous, common-sense, unhelpful, waste of time. I won't again consider or download a self-help book. I'll rapid-fire go through every single one I've saved, just to reduce space and be content. Deletion s-s-s-satisfiessss.

Same old garbage. Predictable, annoying, platitudinous, common-sense, unhelpful, waste of time. I won't again consider or download a self-help book. I'll rapid-fire go through every single one I've saved, just to reduce space and be content. Deletion s-s-s-satisfiessss.

Over-the-top parody/satire of the fecal fanfare that is US politics (be on a local or federal level, as seen by natives and foreigner from abroad and at home), albeit kinda leftie-biased, albeit not fully trump-derangement syndrome. Still though, all around good–great short, one-time read.

Over-the-top parody/satire of the fecal fanfare that is US politics (be on a local or federal level, as seen by natives and foreigner from abroad and at home), albeit kinda leftie-biased, albeit not fully trump-derangement syndrome. Still though, all around good–great short, one-time read.

Over-the-top parody/satire of the fecal fanfare that is US politics (be on a local or federal level, as seen by natives and foreigner from abroad and at home), albeit kinda leftie-biased, albeit not fully trump-derangement syndrome. Still though, all around good–great short, one-time read.

Found this in my dir whilst looking for some fiction, something to forfeit my mind to in pleasure. Welp. this Brazilian-born strange dude self-described as having been a criminal behaviorist/psychologist, been a 'musician' with famour glam rock bands (I've never read up, heard up, seen, experienced person describe themselves as such, rather they choose the more apt instrument-er/ist) and somehow settled from the US to London, of all shit places.., to become a (thriller) author.

His major work is 10 novels with an L.A. detective Robert Hunter in the 'ultra violent crimes' division. There are no clear ties, or feelings of missing something, regardless that this is the 8. one. All in all, is was alright or good. Two flaws in the writing which haven't been fixed (and I'm hoping aren't intensified retroactively) are that: 1. faux drama⸻a very toned down version of Indian soap opera reaction shots and utterances that are distracting, non-plot-developmental and inconsequential, and, worst of all, jarringly out of character (for the main guy, at least); 2. 65 chapters, really? slightly redundant with former point, but they're structured like soap episodes, all but the epilogue end on suspenseful moments, that I wouldn't always call cliff-hangers, not even author's teasing. Annoying if anything, because you don't get all the information at the same time, or even in the same chapter. This staggering messes with suspense-release on > tracks, which I'd call bad.

All that being said, given how shit the competition most often is, it a good thriller, or crime-novel. Gore good.

Thinking back on the past 7 books, one, that is, I really does see the author's progression. The plot is good, connected, and complex enough to still be enjoyable without too much concentration on details (with are provided wholesale only when author decides⸻the exact react why I hate A.C.D.'s Sherlock series), albeit, being a thriller you'd expect as much, Contains a lot more amateurish aspects, such as over-the-top/over-dramatized dialogue and moments; still has the same reaction shots from Indo soaps, and simpler language use. Unless it's a chronologically consistent series, there's an ~13a gap between 00 and 01, which is unfilled. The main support also is much more of a comic relief, it's as if author wanted to be a soap scriptwriter, I don't get it. It's unappealing, distracting, and doesn't further anything. Looking forward to the 2⸺7 & 9⸺10.

Thinking back on the past 7 books, one, that is, I really does see the author's progression. The plot is good, connected, and complex enough to still be enjoyable without too much concentration on details (with are provided wholesale only when author decides⸻the exact react why I hate A.C.D.'s Sherlock series), albeit, being a thriller you'd expect as much, Contains a lot more amateurish aspects, such as over-the-top/over-dramatized dialogue and moments; still has the same reaction shots from Indo soaps, and simpler language use. Unless it's a chronologically consistent series, there's an ~13a gap between 00 and 01, which is unfilled. The main support also is much more of a comic relief, it's as if author wanted to be a soap scriptwriter, I don't get it. It's unappealing, distracting, and doesn't further anything. Looking forward to the 2⸺7 & 9⸺10.

Compared to 01, much more complicated plot, and even though I paid more attention, the amount of characters (and you know author hand out only distinct, unique, hate-your-parents sort of names to facilitate remembrance) is ~4⸺5x that of 01. A lot less cringe, but the over-dramatized things still bug me. Given their presence in 08, it's likely a feature, not a bug, as Todd would say. I don't do good with history (dates), and names, much better with ideas, abstractions, actions, rather than descriptions. I think the following characterization will persist in all titles, even without the series: filler à la Indian reaction shots, that is, exclamations (on the other hand, it makes it more cheesy, which sometimes works in its favor, like the new bitch boss of the police department with cliché overflow), a few catch-phrases that all three so far read have used 2⸺4 times, and something that probably has a name but I don't know it, namely, more or less '*overenthusiastic trailer/announcer voice: from an early age, this genius was abused (echo abused), he suffered trauma (..-ma.. -ma), and now, he's back for revenge!'⸻copy-paste with different extrema for for the main, support, and all villains. But it worth it, a nice plot. T h i c c.

Compared to 02, less interwoven plot, less characters and fewer plot points to resolve. Sadly, less gore and violence, too. Nonetheless, worth a one-read, enjoyable.

I'd long thought about the American left (the European, British, and Australian follow suit with some delay) as cryptonazies and cryptofascists. I just didn't know how deep this shit ran. And how far back. Fucking hell. It is thoroughly disgusting what humans will do to each other.

This books provides the herd leftists' perspective in its best light⸻already abysmally wan⸻, and of some unbiased or intellectually honest, morally uncorrupt scientists/academicians/historians that just do their job. It's not hard to see the vying for power, control over others and the lying, cheating, stealing, covering up, minimizing and apologizing for used to achieve American cryptonazies and cryptofascists have utilizing across all playing fields when you see the results alongside the whole of of historical evidence, and the many side-by-side comparisons.

Hypocrisy somehow always materializes (within humans) to gunk up any and all human endeavors, true; I take that as a given. But mistakenly assumed not total incompetence, mischievousness, and hypocrisy of the left. That they had ≥one good deed, something of merit. Yeah, well, nope. The prominents play for power only. 'Career politicians' you could say, those exist on all sides, true, but truer of than than of others.

The book is rather neutral, the support I've noticed in the author's words or wording is that of Christianity (he does have a 1 or 2 books about why it's great regarding America..).

There has yet to be a single (more than a capitalist counterpart) successful state in the last 5000 years as far as I know. They degenerate, an intricate network of corruption is woven from the very top to the very bottom, lone cogs suffer, smaller groups suffer, the honest and hardworking suffer, the state rots, putrifies, and eventually dissolves, because excesses of the pyramid atop the pyramid cannot be upheld, but until then 'might is right', possibly beyond that as well, so long as the stupid unyieldingly stupid children are provided bread and circuses.

On point, not too breath-y, and based.

A deeper look into the superforecasters mentioned in

A deeper look into the superforecasters mentioned in

A deeper look into the superforecasters mentioned in

A deeper look into the superforecasters mentioned in

A deeper look into the superforecasters mentioned in

Up til ~2/3 was weak, not as deep as the previously read ones. A lot less suspense and release throughout, and, say, 3⸺5s of the mystery/plot see the Sun rapid-fire within 2 chapters around the 90%. Less gore. Again, no character development as if, the first book was strongest there. You can make the case as with other detective novels, that cases happen separately, as if in their own Everett universe. Shorter too..

This book was referenced in

The slope from 3 to 4 was downward, and steep, but tolerable. This jump was in the same direction and of the same magnitude. We're not quite vertical, but it's pretty mediocre. Explanation repetitions, long wind, and the same issue plaguing 8, 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4. Another unused cast of characters. Too little action, gore, which are the only reasons I liked this series, I've not had any exposure to gore novels, maybe I should research and find some.

The slope from 3 to 4 was downward, and steep, but tolerable. This jump was in the same direction and of the same magnitude. We're not quite vertical, but it's pretty mediocre. Explanation repetitions, long wind, and the same issue plaguing 8, 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4. Another unused cast of characters. Too little action, gore, which are the only reasons I liked this series, I've not had any exposure to gore novels, maybe I should research and find some.

I like the jabs, and jokes. But I fucking hate jewry, and religious anything. The jesus char getting everything served on a silver platter, whilst whilst playing innocent is too annoying, to infuriating. These people should be shot. Given the current state of affairs at home, in the EU and US, there is little-to-no reason to tolerate this fuckery.

Great writer, bad topic, or too much worship. Fuck him for this. First ch moore book I couldn't finish, ffs. I'm mad.ss

I like the jabs, and jokes. But I fucking hate jewry, and religious anything. The jesus char getting everything served on a silver platter, whilst whilst playing innocent is too annoying, to infuriating. These people should be shot. Given the current state of affairs at home, in the EU and US, there is little-to-no reason to tolerate this fuckery.

Great writer, bad topic, or too much worship. Fuck him for this. First ch moore book I couldn't finish, ffs. I'm mad.ss

Major game step-up. The last two were weak, as if written in financial need and or quick succession. What I dislike about this one is the incongruence within all significant characters: being professional, then amateurish and or childish; being omniprescient, then⸻surprised; keeping their cool, then losing it. Robert Hunter is not believable, but the killer, the antag, my nigga is not perfect, but very close. Very nicely constructed. As much as I hated all the predictable interactions between the 'good' toons with and within themselves, and their surroundings, 3⸺5-fold more was my pleasure in scenes with antag in control, with thing going according to plan, with the stupid fucks incapable of independent thought. Putting aside plot armor, hypocrisy (again), and inconsistent morality: it is extremely кино. Tad disappointing ending though. We need more authors with ball to kill off main characters, and let the 'bad' guys win. Not great for a running series most likely.

Major game step-up. The last two were weak, as if written in financial need and or quick succession. What I dislike about this one is the incongruence within all significant characters: being professional, then amateurish and or childish; being omniprescient, then⸻surprised; keeping their cool, then losing it. Robert Hunter is not believable, but the killer, the antag, my nigga is not perfect, but very close. Very nicely constructed. As much as I hated all the predictable interactions between the 'good' toons with and within themselves, and their surroundings, 3⸺5-fold more was my pleasure in scenes with antag in control, with thing going according to plan, with the stupid fucks incapable of independent thought. Putting aside plot armor, hypocrisy (again), and inconsistent morality: it is extremely кино. Tad disappointing ending though. We need more authors with ball to kill off main characters, and let the 'bad' guys win. Not great for a running series most likely.

Nice idea, but either aimed at children/teens and or very naively and amateurishly executed with a rather palpable left-wing bias. From main to support to accidental, all characters are shallow and predictable. Also has false allegations, and cringe-worthy, unwarranted jabs at Trump, the US 'right', and the older parts of internet culture. I'd bet top dollar Yoon is either very old or younger than myself, in either case both uninvolved and very unknowledgeable. He might have good intentions, but that's worth fuck all, esp. so when the both means and results are mediocre at best meanwhile disseminating unhelpful, baby ideas and motivations, and (re-)stating falsehoods. NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEXT!!

This book was publish 7 years after The Victory of Reason. Omitting some 30⸺40%, it often is an argument-for-argument and word-for-word rehash of it, especially parts 1 and 2. It is a broader topic, correspondingly accessing more resources, citations and references spanning a greater period. I'm still wary of the Christian bias, however well-substantiated and -referenced. I'm always wary..

I hate nearly all people within this novel. Pretentious, nagging, inconsistent. Other than human prediction and modelling practice, this novel offers nothing of value to me within the first 15%. Fuck you, Freudian shitknob. Fuck you too, Joyce.

I hate nearly all people within this novel. Pretentious, nagging, inconsistent. Other than human prediction and modelling practice, this novel offers nothing of value to me within the first 15%. Fuck you, Freudian shitknob. Fuck you too, Joyce.

I hate nearly all people within this novel. Pretentious, nagging, inconsistent. Other than human prediction and modelling practice, this novel offers nothing of value to me within the first 15%. Fuck you, Freudian shitknob. Fuck you too, Joyce.

I hate nearly all people within this novel. Pretentious, nagging, inconsistent. Other than human prediction and modelling practice, this novel offers nothing of value to me within the first 15%. Fuck you, Freudian shitknob. Fuck you too, Joyce.

I hate nearly all people within this novel. Pretentious, nagging, inconsistent. Other than human prediction and modelling practice, this novel offers nothing of value to me within the first 15%. Fuck you, Freudian shitknob. Fuck you too, Joyce.

I hate nearly all people within this novel. Pretentious, nagging, inconsistent. Other than human prediction and modelling practice, this novel offers nothing of value to me within the first 15%. Fuck you, Freudian shitknob. Fuck you too, Joyce.

This was a treat, and it even had a bit of what 8 does. Great plot, and very nice and subtle twist(s) at the very end. Satisfying.

When one is this deluded, and wrong within less than 5 pages, the book would be an exercise in pointing out mistakes. I'm not teaching a class, and I'm not educating idiots, so that'd be less wisely spent time. Fuck you, Vince. Though I hope you learn some day.

When one is this deluded, and wrong within less than 5 pages, the book would be an exercise in pointing out mistakes. I'm not teaching a class, and I'm not educating idiots, so that'd be less wisely spent time. Fuck you, Vince. Though I hope you learn some day.

When one is this deluded, and wrong within less than 5 pages, the book would be an exercise in pointing out mistakes. I'm not teaching a class, and I'm not educating idiots, so that'd be less wisely spent time. Fuck you, Vince. Though I hope you learn some day.

Cui bono?, or 'follow the money'⸻the book. Even though it was written in 2006, it explain in detail how Soros acts, and how Soros benefits. Quintessential evil jew, smart enough to use Marxism-derived shit to make money hand over fist over hand over... The amount of foreshadowing, prescience is scary. Or rather, it's been the same since the 60s (and earlier still), the intensification of everything, acceleration has been getting out of hand as if..?

Cui bono?, or 'follow the money'⸻the book. Even though it was written in 2006, it explain in detail how Soros acts, and how Soros benefits. Quintessential evil jew, smart enough to use Marxism-derived shit to make money hand over fist over hand over... The amount of foreshadowing, prescience is scary. Or rather, it's been the same since the 60s (and earlier still), the intensification of everything, acceleration has been getting out of hand as if..?

Cui bono?, or 'follow the money'⸻the book. Even though it was written in 2006, it explain in detail how Soros acts, and how Soros benefits. Quintessential evil jew, smart enough to use Marxism-derived shit to make money hand over fist over hand over... The amount of foreshadowing, prescience is scary. Or rather, it's been the same since the 60s (and earlier still), the intensification of everything, acceleration has been getting out of hand as if..?

Cui bono?, or 'follow the money'⸻the book. Even though it was written in 2006, it explain in detail how Soros acts, and how Soros benefits. Quintessential evil jew, smart enough to use Marxism-derived shit to make money hand over fist over hand over... The amount of foreshadowing, prescience is scary. Or rather, it's been the same since the 60s (and earlier still), the intensification of everything, acceleration has been getting out of hand as if..?

Cui bono?, or 'follow the money'⸻the book. Even though it was written in 2006, it explain in detail how Soros acts, and how Soros benefits. Quintessential evil jew, smart enough to use Marxism-derived shit to make money hand over fist over hand over... The amount of foreshadowing, prescience is scary. Or rather, it's been the same since the 60s (and earlier still), the intensification of everything, acceleration has been getting out of hand as if..?

Somewhat interesting story, or rather interesting from the point of view that it's a nothing author from a shit country with shit writers (about as much as Ireland) making a story about a sociopathic child/teen inflicting harm on various living subjects for no discernible reason other than plot. Deus ex machina, divine intervention, plot armor, blind everyone, etc., all seem to be typical of 1970s–80s–90s whereversville, scotland. This is bad writing that's good enough for for somebody who occasionally reads, and has never thought for himself in his life. That some people might think this is normal sociopathic, or psychopathic, or any kind of consistent human behavior is appalling to me, but hypocrisy, that is, self-serving and often malevolent self-inconsistency reigns over most humans.
Great closing act, though.

Somewhat interesting story, or rather interesting from the point of view that it's a nothing author from a shit country with shit writers (about as much as Ireland) making a story about a sociopathic child/teen inflicting harm on various living subjects for no discernible reason other than plot. Deus ex machina, divine intervention, plot armor, blind everyone, etc., all seem to be typical of 1970s–80s–90s whereversville, scotland. This is bad writing that's good enough for for somebody who occasionally reads, and has never thought for himself in his life. That some people might think this is normal sociopathic, or psychopathic, or any kind of consistent human behavior is appalling to me, but hypocrisy, that is, self-serving and often malevolent self-inconsistency reigns over most humans.
Great closing act, though.

Somewhat interesting story, or rather interesting from the point of view that it's a nothing author from a shit country with shit writers (about as much as Ireland) making a story about a sociopathic child/teen inflicting harm on various living subjects for no discernible reason other than plot. Deus ex machina, divine intervention, plot armor, blind everyone, etc., all seem to be typical of 1970s–80s–90s whereversville, scotland. This is bad writing that's good enough for for somebody who occasionally reads, and has never thought for himself in his life. That some people might think this is normal sociopathic, or psychopathic, or any kind of consistent human behavior is appalling to me, but hypocrisy, that is, self-serving and often malevolent self-inconsistency reigns over most humans.
Great closing act, though.

Somewhat interesting story, or rather interesting from the point of view that it's a nothing author from a shit country with shit writers (about as much as Ireland) making a story about a sociopathic child/teen inflicting harm on various living subjects for no discernible reason other than plot. Deus ex machina, divine intervention, plot armor, blind everyone, etc., all seem to be typical of 1970s–80s–90s whereversville, scotland. This is bad writing that's good enough for for somebody who occasionally reads, and has never thought for himself in his life. That some people might think this is normal sociopathic, or psychopathic, or any kind of consistent human behavior is appalling to me, but hypocrisy, that is, self-serving and often malevolent self-inconsistency reigns over most humans.
Great closing act, though.

Somewhat interesting story, or rather interesting from the point of view that it's a nothing author from a shit country with shit writers (about as much as Ireland) making a story about a sociopathic child/teen inflicting harm on various living subjects for no discernible reason other than plot. Deus ex machina, divine intervention, plot armor, blind everyone, etc., all seem to be typical of 1970s–80s–90s whereversville, scotland. This is bad writing that's good enough for for somebody who occasionally reads, and has never thought for himself in his life. That some people might think this is normal sociopathic, or psychopathic, or any kind of consistent human behavior is appalling to me, but hypocrisy, that is, self-serving and often malevolent self-inconsistency reigns over most humans.
Great closing act, though.

Somewhat interesting story, or rather interesting from the point of view that it's a nothing author from a shit country with shit writers (about as much as Ireland) making a story about a sociopathic child/teen inflicting harm on various living subjects for no discernible reason other than plot. Deus ex machina, divine intervention, plot armor, blind everyone, etc., all seem to be typical of 1970s–80s–90s whereversville, scotland. This is bad writing that's good enough for for somebody who occasionally reads, and has never thought for himself in his life. That some people might think this is normal sociopathic, or psychopathic, or any kind of consistent human behavior is appalling to me, but hypocrisy, that is, self-serving and often malevolent self-inconsistency reigns over most humans.
Great closing act, though.

Somewhat interesting story, or rather interesting from the point of view that it's a nothing author from a shit country with shit writers (about as much as Ireland) making a story about a sociopathic child/teen inflicting harm on various living subjects for no discernible reason other than plot. Deus ex machina, divine intervention, plot armor, blind everyone, etc., all seem to be typical of 1970s–80s–90s whereversville, scotland. This is bad writing that's good enough for for somebody who occasionally reads, and has never thought for himself in his life. That some people might think this is normal sociopathic, or psychopathic, or any kind of consistent human behavior is appalling to me, but hypocrisy, that is, self-serving and often malevolent self-inconsistency reigns over most humans.
Great closing act, though.

Somewhat interesting story, or rather interesting from the point of view that it's a nothing author from a shit country with shit writers (about as much as Ireland) making a story about a sociopathic child/teen inflicting harm on various living subjects for no discernible reason other than plot. Deus ex machina, divine intervention, plot armor, blind everyone, etc., all seem to be typical of 1970s–80s–90s whereversville, scotland. This is bad writing that's good enough for for somebody who occasionally reads, and has never thought for himself in his life. That some people might think this is normal sociopathic, or psychopathic, or any kind of consistent human behavior is appalling to me, but hypocrisy, that is, self-serving and often malevolent self-inconsistency reigns over most humans.
Great closing act, though.

Good enough, not as strong as previous two. Great reminder of why women should be barred from mens' work (and vice versa), and why emotions are mostly useless, unhelpful trash. Ridden with same issues as previous 9.

Amateurish at times, it seemed to me, but I think, given the author's afterword in the audiobook version, this was perhaps what he sought. Not mediocrity but rather to provoke thought in readers, which he said would consider the novel's success. Would I have done better, otherwise, or the same? What it all have played out the same? Armchaim philosophy wouldn't help here much. The character supposedly were chosen such as to fit a particular never explicated profile (which I loosely gathered to be loser/failure with no desires/ambitions/achievements/prospectives in life).

The idea of 'choice and consequence' was explored in

Amateurish at times, it seemed to me, but I think, given the author's afterword in the audiobook version, this was perhaps what he sought. Not mediocrity but rather to provoke thought in readers, which he said would consider the novel's success. Would I have done better, otherwise, or the same? What it all have played out the same? Armchaim philosophy wouldn't help here much. The character supposedly were chosen such as to fit a particular never explicated profile (which I loosely gathered to be loser/failure with no desires/ambitions/achievements/prospectives in life).

The idea of 'choice and consequence' was explored in

Amateurish at times, it seemed to me, but I think, given the author's afterword in the audiobook version, this was perhaps what he sought. Not mediocrity but rather to provoke thought in readers, which he said would consider the novel's success. Would I have done better, otherwise, or the same? What it all have played out the same? Armchaim philosophy wouldn't help here much. The character supposedly were chosen such as to fit a particular never explicated profile (which I loosely gathered to be loser/failure with no desires/ambitions/achievements/prospectives in life).

The idea of 'choice and consequence' was explored in

Amateurish at times, it seemed to me, but I think, given the author's afterword in the audiobook version, this was perhaps what he sought. Not mediocrity but rather to provoke thought in readers, which he said would consider the novel's success. Would I have done better, otherwise, or the same? What it all have played out the same? Armchaim philosophy wouldn't help here much. The character supposedly were chosen such as to fit a particular never explicated profile (which I loosely gathered to be loser/failure with no desires/ambitions/achievements/prospectives in life).

The idea of 'choice and consequence' was explored in

Amateurish at times, it seemed to me, but I think, given the author's afterword in the audiobook version, this was perhaps what he sought. Not mediocrity but rather to provoke thought in readers, which he said would consider the novel's success. Would I have done better, otherwise, or the same? What it all have played out the same? Armchaim philosophy wouldn't help here much. The character supposedly were chosen such as to fit a particular never explicated profile (which I loosely gathered to be loser/failure with no desires/ambitions/achievements/prospectives in life).

The idea of 'choice and consequence' was explored in

The Metamorphosis but funnier and with more exploration of sexual matters.

Although I fucking hate Russian literature, I've had Gogol stories in school lit curriculum, and have attended one of his plays as well. All I remember was 'The Overcoat', and that everything else was mind-numbingly boring. The audiobook version's translation is horrible (Isabel F. Hapgood, a fucking cunt a woman again ruins shit), given the amount of of existing ones. I mean, for fuck's sake, how often do you see beetles in the Russian winter indoors? From Kafka's Metamorphosis (in the original southern German), Ungeziefer would translate as vermin, pest, bugs, wild animals, how any translator would substitute a beetle in these' place and expect pay is beyond me.

Anyways, I fucking hate Russia. All of it forever and always, regardless, at this particular point in time A.A. is an utter loser, wholly irredeemable. Self-improvement? Nah. Status? Nah. Friends? Nah. Family? Nah. Hobbies? Nah. Goals? Nah. Et cetera. The Gutenberg printing press has existed from a some 200, 300 years and these niggas still be using copyists to further fatten to bureaucracy. I take this despicable story as a tragicomedy for weak, shallow men, losers.

Fuck Russia, and fuck Russians.

Bit of a while it took me to make concrete wherefrom remembrance was nagging me. The latest Alien franchise movie is based on this very novel (or vice versa, who fucking cares). However, whereas it was exponentially underperformant compared to the already diminishingly returning Alien3, this vivifies that sterile money grab, redeemed by its visuals only. Even though characters were too numerous for me to keep track of (personal flaw stemming from difficulty to relate to human matter⸻my guess), they were distinct in their motivations, alliances, relations, attitudes. To me, that, rather than some rando future space names, made them.

Aboard the crashed ship and within the cathedral the movies hands-down outshines the book's descriptions. The latter's layout of the plot is substantially denser, more explicit, detailed (assuming it's the same).

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

I first rest this on my kindle back in, say, 10. grade, could've been 11. or 9th. It was a big turning point in my maturation, intellectual and emotional. I took much to heart and unconsciously acted and thought accordingly for the following 4⸺5 years, or til around when uni started getting too involved, me depressed and bogged down by circumstance, etc. Proper focus lacks in my life currently. Feelings of overpowering loneliness and malaise and disappointment constrict me with shrinking periods, blotting out hours up to the whole day.

So I thought it prudent to 1: keep handy this book as a .txt file; and 2: revisit the sole worthwhile self-help book ever written. This, I think, is something to keep in mind and not forget. And I've forgotten some shit. Fuck me, I know. Comparing to others in the genre, two things soar out. First regards quality: it's not pretentious, self-righteous, absolute, nor condescending. Second regards style: no baby language, no exercises, summaries, key points/notes/takeaways or other filler. It is curt, albeit the examples are annoying and unrelatable, and well-structured: example, thesis, argument, and possibly another example. The use of 'fuck' (or other expletives) is not too juvenile, more everyday, or tryhard so.

I'd recommend this book⸻more accurately, the first 25⸺50% of it⸻to anybody growing up, having problems, or having forgotten its advice.

Fucking hell, what an cunt this guy is. Everything opportunity in life, every chance turning out lucky for him, fucking hell, fucking hate self-entitled cunts like this, so fucking much. Fuck you.

Spite aside, descriptions were mired, beleaguered with a handful of words used frequently enough to produce a positive afterimage in my when reading other material. Barely tolerable.

Along with 127, and The Abominable, this is my third book into mountaineering/climbing/etc. A true story as the former, but unlike it, well-written, more interesting and having more substance, consequence, and character depth.

Postscriptum Just now I understand why the whole plot seems familiar, namely, there exists an eponymous movie based on the book's events, that I've watched in the past.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

The fuck is this⸻Lolita but with boys..? I fucking hate Germans sometimes. Lolita wasn't this cringe-worthy though, no, no. It took itself less seriously, this is supposedly serious lit from early 20. century. Kinda nice, but also insufferable.

On-the-ground reporting, or documenting of Marxist infantiles destroying property, tradition; injuring/killing police officers/civilians, and, ultimately, making everything worse for themselves and anyone in their vicinity. This is no historic look-back, scholarly or theoretical work, as the other books on the subject that I have or have read. It's not new information, but nevertheless, the perspective it offers is one of a target and of just another blackbloc in the crowd.

On-the-ground reporting, or documenting of Marxist infantiles destroying property, tradition; injuring/killing police officers/civilians, and, ultimately, making everything worse for themselves and anyone in their vicinity. This is no historic look-back, scholarly or theoretical work, as the other books on the subject that I have or have read. It's not new information, but nevertheless, the perspective it offers is one of a target and of just another blackbloc in the crowd.

Slightly one-sided biography. I get the drift once, and it keeping the very same every so often. Listening to Donald Trump Jr. talking about his grandparents was far more content-ful. The modelling world has changed much, if at all, I think, in the last 40 years. Despite the matter's potential, the author bored.

If you're the prominent a writer, as your foreword suggest, you fuck, why does nobody know your name? Regardless, the advice seemed at first (didn't leaf through to confirm) to be based on the class of the work with 'short stories' heading it. I assume novels, poems/sonatas, etc., follow but it was dogmatic, authoritarian, pontificating, and one-sided. What some mean by 'academic' in its worse sense, is precisely this.
Inapplicable blather.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Surprised to a see a 'boat kino' I hopped aboard. HBO or NetFlix had made a series or movie out of this, I later learned⸻likely why the audiobook came out synchronously. The author's sole entry in libgen is our here title.

It has its moment, few as they may be. Some characters seem to be more black-and-white (mostly black) than what the real world presents, and I wouldn't allow a measly century or two to change all humans (in the book) into either cunts and saints. Being involve in the conspiracy exculpates the somewhat, but moral qualms or thought are more deficient the present nonetheless. Like a theatrical play, wherein everything is exaggerated, such that 6-year-olds can get the moral of the story, The North Water (title drop, lol), to me, seems more staged than plausible, only⸻the lesson to be learned is missing. Just a story.

Rather malinformed, Marxist cunt presents his opinions and the within the metal community popular, mainstream agreed upon views. Annoying for constantly spewing falsehoods and information that has nothing to do with heavy metal. Worthless if you've listened through majors and minors from the 50s onwards. Personally, I learned nothing, but needed something easy to listen to.

Rather malinformed, Marxist cunt presents his opinions and the within the metal community popular, mainstream agreed upon views. Annoying for constantly spewing falsehoods and information that has nothing to do with heavy metal. Worthless if you've listened through majors and minors from the 50s onwards. Personally, I learned nothing, but needed something easy to listen to.

Rather malinformed, Marxist cunt presents his opinions and the within the metal community popular, mainstream agreed upon views. Annoying for constantly spewing falsehoods and information that has nothing to do with heavy metal. Worthless if you've listened through majors and minors from the 50s onwards. Personally, I learned nothing, but needed something easy to listen to.

Rather malinformed, Marxist cunt presents his opinions and the within the metal community popular, mainstream agreed upon views. Annoying for constantly spewing falsehoods and information that has nothing to do with heavy metal. Worthless if you've listened through majors and minors from the 50s onwards. Personally, I learned nothing, but needed something easy to listen to.

In media, book or movie, I've rarely come across a well-placed, well-purposed amnesia. This book could've been written after all the rest were finished, and it'd've still been apposite, imo; it adds and never subtracts. Branching off the main storyline, this book connects Ripley to the events from Covenant Origins and Covenant, as well as, in the future,

In media, book or movie, I've rarely come across a well-placed, well-purposed amnesia. This book could've been written after all the rest were finished, and it'd've still been apposite, imo; it adds and never subtracts. Branching off the main storyline, this book connects Ripley to the events from Covenant Origins and Covenant, as well as, in the future,

In media, book or movie, I've rarely come across a well-placed, well-purposed amnesia. This book could've been written after all the rest were finished, and it'd've still been apposite, imo; it adds and never subtracts. Branching off the main storyline, this book connects Ripley to the events from Covenant Origins and Covenant, as well as, in the future,

In media, book or movie, I've rarely come across a well-placed, well-purposed amnesia. This book could've been written after all the rest were finished, and it'd've still been apposite, imo; it adds and never subtracts. Branching off the main storyline, this book connects Ripley to the events from Covenant Origins and Covenant, as well as, in the future,

First collection stories, of which all are good or great, I've read. Some remind of observational standup routines: deadpan delivery, absurdist themes and motifs⸻it does well to color them without ever harming the message, and de-pinkifying them, fore they are all mostly love stories, love of one kind or another. Overall great.

I had annoyances with 2 stories, being gynocentric, -apologetic, and -enabling, also featuring degenerate human behavior as normal. Kind of 'leftie', but it's mostly skirting, and the majority of the stories' content is different from others I've read, and good despite the above. And even though others were told from the viewpoint of a female, which is a first for me (a collection of stories some 10 rows about I'd abruptly stopped for being bad, but was also from that POV and was so, so, so very weird, it'd been penned by one too). Lastly, fuck women. F-f-fuck women. Reading shit like this (part of how women are and men interact with women), in addition to seeing what the most 'modern', Marx-ball-sucking countries have allowed them to become (they for political power and financial gain), I've begun nursing a rejuvenated loathing for women. Humanity and evolution weren't enough.

First collection stories, of which all are good or great, I've read. Some remind of observational standup routines: deadpan delivery, absurdist themes and motifs⸻it does well to color them without ever harming the message, and de-pinkifying them, fore they are all mostly love stories, love of one kind or another. Overall great.

I had annoyances with 2 stories, being gynocentric, -apologetic, and -enabling, also featuring degenerate human behavior as normal. Kind of 'leftie', but it's mostly skirting, and the majority of the stories' content is different from others I've read, and good despite the above. And even though others were told from the viewpoint of a female, which is a first for me (a collection of stories some 10 rows about I'd abruptly stopped for being bad, but was also from that POV and was so, so, so very weird, it'd been penned by one too). Lastly, fuck women. F-f-fuck women. Reading shit like this (part of how women are and men interact with women), in addition to seeing what the most 'modern', Marx-ball-sucking countries have allowed them to become (they for political power and financial gain), I've begun nursing a rejuvenated loathing for women. Humanity and evolution weren't enough.

I didn't ask for your boringass, stupid, gay, inane bullshit life stories.

I didn't ask for your boringass, stupid, gay, inane bullshit life stories.

WY made a colony on LV-223, where Ripley's crew found the delerict dog ship, the xenos, etc., Alien the movie more than less. Colonial marines and more xenos, but also kinda meh.

WY made a colony on LV-223, where Ripley's crew found the delerict dog ship, the xenos, etc., Alien the movie more than less. Colonial marines and more xenos, but also kinda meh.

Chronologically publication-wise the first to have narration (or just view point) from the other side, that of the xenos. Although the quality of mr. Moore's writing is below that of the Foster and Lebbon, about on par Golden, the storyline, taking place some 300a after the events of the Nostromo (or the David, trimonite mine planet, fuck me if I'm gonna read through 100 pages of alien wiki; also a GIANT fuck you for not have easily comprehensible novel timeline). Has some niceties about how humans fuck up everything, for everybody else and themselves, about the self-propagating and evolving nature of 'life', and other shit to think about.

Chronologically publication-wise the first to have narration (or just view point) from the other side, that of the xenos. Although the quality of mr. Moore's writing is below that of the Foster and Lebbon, about on par Golden, the storyline, taking place some 300a after the events of the Nostromo (or the David, trimonite mine planet, fuck me if I'm gonna read through 100 pages of alien wiki; also a GIANT fuck you for not have easily comprehensible novel timeline). Has some niceties about how humans fuck up everything, for everybody else and themselves, about the self-propagating and evolving nature of 'life', and other shit to think about.

Chronologically publication-wise the first to have narration (or just view point) from the other side, that of the xenos. Although the quality of mr. Moore's writing is below that of the Foster and Lebbon, about on par Golden, the storyline, taking place some 300a after the events of the Nostromo (or the David, trimonite mine planet, fuck me if I'm gonna read through 100 pages of alien wiki; also a GIANT fuck you for not have easily comprehensible novel timeline). Has some niceties about how humans fuck up everything, for everybody else and themselves, about the self-propagating and evolving nature of 'life', and other shit to think about.

Chronologically publication-wise the first to have narration (or just view point) from the other side, that of the xenos. Although the quality of mr. Moore's writing is below that of the Foster and Lebbon, about on par Golden, the storyline, taking place some 300a after the events of the Nostromo (or the David, trimonite mine planet, fuck me if I'm gonna read through 100 pages of alien wiki; also a GIANT fuck you for not have easily comprehensible novel timeline). Has some niceties about how humans fuck up everything, for everybody else and themselves, about the self-propagating and evolving nature of 'life', and other shit to think about.

Chronologically publication-wise the first to have narration (or just view point) from the other side, that of the xenos. Although the quality of mr. Moore's writing is below that of the Foster and Lebbon, about on par Golden, the storyline, taking place some 300a after the events of the Nostromo (or the David, trimonite mine planet, fuck me if I'm gonna read through 100 pages of alien wiki; also a GIANT fuck you for not have easily comprehensible novel timeline). Has some niceties about how humans fuck up everything, for everybody else and themselves, about the self-propagating and evolving nature of 'life', and other shit to think about.

Chronologically publication-wise the first to have narration (or just view point) from the other side, that of the xenos. Although the quality of mr. Moore's writing is below that of the Foster and Lebbon, about on par Golden, the storyline, taking place some 300a after the events of the Nostromo (or the David, trimonite mine planet, fuck me if I'm gonna read through 100 pages of alien wiki; also a GIANT fuck you for not have easily comprehensible novel timeline). Has some niceties about how humans fuck up everything, for everybody else and themselves, about the self-propagating and evolving nature of 'life', and other shit to think about.

This section deserves inclusion in its entirety. Dandily a bullseye's bullseye, especially post 202003xx.

IV Between the aims of the post-totalitarian system and the aims of life there is a yawning abyss: while life, in its essence, moves towards plurality, diversity, independent self-constitution and self-organization, in short, towards the fulfillment of its own freedom, the post-totalitarian system demands conformity, uniformity, and discipline. While life ever strives to create new and ‘improbable' structures, the post-totalitarian system contrives to force life into its most probable states. The aims of the system reveal its most essential characteristic to be introversion, a movement towards being ever more completely and unreservedly itself, which means that the radius of its influence is continually widening as well. This system serves people only to the extent necessary to ensure that people will serve it. Anything beyond this, that is to say, anything which leads people to overstep their predetermined roles, is regarded by the system as an attack upon itself. And in this respect it is correct: every instance of such transgression is a genuine denial of the system. It can be said, therefore, that the inner aim of the post-totalitarian system is not mere preservation of power in the hands of a ruling clique, as appears to be the case at first sight. Rather, the social phenomenon of self-preservation is subordinated to something higher, to a kind of blind automatism which drives the system. No matter what position individuals hold in the hierarchy of power, they are not considered by the system to be worth anything in themselves, but only as things intended to fuel and serve this automatism. For this reason, an individual's desire for power is admissible only in so far as its direction coincides with the direction of the automatism of the system. Ideology, in creating a bridge of excuses between the system and the individual, spans the abyss between the aims of the system and the aims of life. It pretends that the requirements of the system derive from the requirements of life. It is a world of appearances trying to pass for reality. The post-totalitarian system touches people at every step, but it does so with its ideological gloves on. This is why life in the system is so thoroughly permeated with hypocrisy and lies: government by bureaucracy is called popular government; the working class is enslaved in the name of the working class; the complete degradation of the individual is presented as his or her ultimate liberation; depriving people of information is called making it available; the use of power to manipulate is called the public control of power, and the arbitrary abuse of power is called observing the legal code; the repression of culture is called its development; the expansion of imperial influence is presented as support for the oppressed; the lack of free expression becomes the highest form of freedom; farcical elections become the highest form of democracy; banning independent thought becomes the most scientific of world views; military occupation becomes fraternal assistance. Because the regime is captive to its own lies, it must falsify everything. It falsifies the past. It falsifies the present, and it falsifies the future. It falsifies statistics. It pretends not to possess an omnipotent and unprincipled police apparatus. It pretends to respect human rights. It pretends to persecute no one. It pretends to fear nothing. It pretends to pretend nothing. Individuals need not believe all these mystifications, but they must behave as though they did, or they must at least tolerate them in silence, or get along well with those who work with them. For this reason, however, they must live within a lie. They need not accept the lie. It is enough for them to have accepted their life with it and in it. For by this very fact, individuals confirm the system, fulfill the system, make the system, are the system.

Rarely is material so stentorian. Rarely am I compelled to reread, rethread, relisten, remember every almost every paragraph. Easily one of the most important books regarding politics for the 20. and 21. centuries, one worthy of rereading a few times.

I know, right?: the book, for me (kinda, I'm no genius). I (supposedly) have ~137 according to a trusted online test and an official, botched MENSA test. Defo not shelling out for another one. It's normalized such that 100 is the baseline, for the testees of that (or previous..?) year).

Although slightly announcing, I found the book describing a significant chunk of my problems in life from highschool onward. Purporting to offer solutions, I didn't find any offered.. Mostly an encouragement to keep on doing the activity most likely to produce desired outcome. Pretty useless as a book, if you do or do not have the IQ score. At best, one, who is experiencing issues derived from having 1⸺3 standard deviations the intelligence quotient above the rest could, rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time).

I know, right?: the book, for me (kinda, I'm no genius). I (supposedly) have ~137 according to a trusted online test and an official, botched MENSA test. Defo not shelling out for another one. It's normalized such that 100 is the baseline, for the testees of that (or previous..?) year).

Although slightly announcing, I found the book describing a significant chunk of my problems in life from highschool onward. Purporting to offer solutions, I didn't find any offered.. Mostly an encouragement to keep on doing the activity most likely to produce desired outcome. Pretty useless as a book, if you do or do not have the IQ score. At best, one, who is experiencing issues derived from having 1⸺3 standard deviations the intelligence quotient above the rest could, rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time).

I know, right?: the book, for me (kinda, I'm no genius). I (supposedly) have ~137 according to a trusted online test and an official, botched MENSA test. Defo not shelling out for another one. It's normalized such that 100 is the baseline, for the testees of that (or previous..?) year).

Although slightly announcing, I found the book describing a significant chunk of my problems in life from highschool onward. Purporting to offer solutions, I didn't find any offered.. Mostly an encouragement to keep on doing the activity most likely to produce desired outcome. Pretty useless as a book, if you do or do not have the IQ score. At best, one, who is experiencing issues derived from having 1⸺3 standard deviations the intelligence quotient above the rest could, rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time).

Amateurish work. It's like observing a person trying his hand at lying⸻details, interesting nobody, serving little-to-no plot purpose, tedious, being offered at every new location, character, plot point, etc. It's like watching people go about their day in anticipation of something, related to the plot of the book, happening. New author, I'd hope, but I'm not checking to get disappointed, enough time lost.

Amateurish work. It's like observing a person trying his hand at lying⸻details, interesting nobody, serving little-to-no plot purpose, tedious, being offered at every new location, character, plot point, etc. It's like watching people go about their day in anticipation of something, related to the plot of the book, happening. New author, I'd hope, but I'm not checking to get disappointed, enough time lost.

Amateurish work. It's like observing a person trying his hand at lying⸻details, interesting nobody, serving little-to-no plot purpose, tedious, being offered at every new location, character, plot point, etc. It's like watching people go about their day in anticipation of something, related to the plot of the book, happening. New author, I'd hope, but I'm not checking to get disappointed, enough time lost.

Amateurish work. It's like observing a person trying his hand at lying⸻details, interesting nobody, serving little-to-no plot purpose, tedious, being offered at every new location, character, plot point, etc. It's like watching people go about their day in anticipation of something, related to the plot of the book, happening. New author, I'd hope, but I'm not checking to get disappointed, enough time lost.

Amateurish work. It's like observing a person trying his hand at lying⸻details, interesting nobody, serving little-to-no plot purpose, tedious, being offered at every new location, character, plot point, etc. It's like watching people go about their day in anticipation of something, related to the plot of the book, happening. New author, I'd hope, but I'm not checking to get disappointed, enough time lost.

Now this... THIS. IS.⸻, well, not Sparta, but КИНО. With far re-enjoy value than 300, and as dense as osmium. It is the abominably cute and scrumptious, aborted fetus, diamond blade angleground to mellifluous, metallic, menarcheal (closest I could think of to an m-initiated word for red), matinal mist. Whose (you don't ask)? Mark Leyner's, via

Now this... THIS. IS.⸻, well, not Sparta, but КИНО. With far re-enjoy value than 300, and as dense as osmium. It is the abominably cute and scrumptious, aborted fetus, diamond blade angleground to mellifluous, metallic, menarcheal (closest I could think of to an m-initiated word for red), matinal mist. Whose (you don't ask)? Mark Leyner's, via

Annoying Yalie shite pointing out conspicuities about the American tertiary education system, and graciously proffering fuck all solution-wise. The hope tree bears naught for anybody (with a brain) having above common knowledge about the current sich and, roughly, the history.

Really liked the below 4 paragraphs or the third part at around 67%. Claws on the door to the answer of how I feel about recorded thought.

But popular culture also gives you models for experience, and so does advertising. Fifty Shades of Grey, a Nike commercial, half the pop songs in the world: they tap directly into your id, submerging you in fantasies of pleasure. Who wouldn't want to live like that? The difference is that art provides you both the models and the means to question them. It demands that you read alertly, with your mind and not just your glands. What are the limits of living like Elizabeth? What might Stephen miss about himself? Does Holden get it wrong? Does Ahab get it right? If the liberal arts turn certainties into questions, the humanities do that, in particular, with ethical and existential certainties: our convictions about how we should act and whom we should be. Stories, says the writer Andrei Codrescu, are engines of reflection. Middlemarch, A Portrait of the Artist, Heart of Darkness, the Odyssey: literature enables us to think about our lives, just as it's been doing in this book. Nor does that reflection only go to values. Everything we find in life we find in art. Ambition in Macbeth and The Sopranos, ennui in Chekhov and Fellini, marginality in Ralph Ellison and Arundhati Roy, and on and endlessly on. I have learned from Dante that love and hate are complements, not opposites (a good thing to know if you happen to belong to a family); from E.M. Forster, that liberal attitudes are often a cover for vanity and ignorance; from Mary Gaitskill, something of the ways the soul is manifested in the body. I don't know that any of those perceptions have influenced my choices, exactly, but they have deeply shaped my understanding of both myself and the world. Edmundson speaks of “the incessant labor of combining your own experience, taken in and metabolized by intense feeling and thought, with what you have acquired in books.” Art and life, back and forth, each illuminating the other, both together creating a self. ... You need to know what people are⸻how they think, what they want, how they act⸻as well as something of the moral pitfalls of your own proposed interventions. (The law of unintended consequences is pretty much the governing principle of narrative art.) The humanities put back everything the social sciences, by way of necessary simplification, take out. Economics, e.g., the most authoritative of the social sciences today, informs us that people are rational actors, forever seeking to maximize their material self-interest⸻an assertion that would come as news to the author of King Lear, let alone The Brothers Karamazov. Only literature, in the words of the diplomatic strategist Charles Hill, is “methodologically unbounded” enough to show how the world really works. I've heard it said that novels are obsolete, that books like War and Peace belong to an age when information could be delivered only in extremely inefficient forms. But War and Peace doesn't tell you the same kinds of things that you can learn from a blog post or a Wikipedia entry, not even fourteen hundred pages of them. It needs to be big and complex because it's telling you something that's big and complex. It doesn't give you “information”; it gives you life. ... “The most successful tyranny,” said Allan Bloom, is “the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities.” The past gave rise to the present, but it is also different from the present. It shows us that things do not have to be the way that they are now. It provides us with a vantage point from which to see that our conventional wisdom is just conventional, not wisdom⸻that what we think is natural is merely cultural; temporal, not eternal; particular, not universal. It offers us an exit from the present. It tells us that things change: not only don't they have to be the way they are, they will not be the way they are. The past, in other words, allows us to create the future. ...

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

Briefly going over some of the results of 'democrats'' policies and decision taking effect in America throughout Obomgo's presidency, being succinct albeit lacking some argumentation (which can easily found in, say, Dinesh D'Souza's books), the book provides the likeliest circumstances with the biggest, simplest solutions and obdurate, infallible reasoning. It's also candidly based.

The same author's The Curse of High IQ would have been been served by this book's solid advice and suggestions over many a topic and issue, rather than bare explanations. I don't wanna say that this is I Know, Right?: The Book: 2: Electic Boogaloo, buuut it does majorly mirror my thoughts around various problems, and solutions and reasonings thereto and thereabout.

To quote myself⸻one ... [could] rather than repeating one's position and arguments therefor, suggest the forgetful parties to read through this short title to get their answers (for the umpteenth time). note to self: reread in 1a.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

An exploration of the question: why conversations pertaining to religion (almost) always go sour for either or both parties tacitly or vulgarly explicitly. A far greater divide than that resultant from arguing with a Marxist, which has been described aptly as two people in same cinema watching different movies simultaneously but thinking the other is watching, and indeed perceiving (concentrating on) the same thing. This is like that, only the two people don't recognize they're both wearing VR headsets, and aren't even sharing the physical space, that is, they're arguing on incommensurable levels. Reminds why church and state are separate, and why church should be so when talking about community, education, morals, rites, etc. Clear-cut argument, well-written.

Very nigga.

P.S. Fuck me, the movie was bad: Ripley looks like an aged skeletor with hair; all interiors are smothered in socialist drabs (brown and gray), whilst also looking decared older than the first Alien movie's; the cast are reduced to one-paragraph memecicles or themself, as if. The weird thing for me is that the novel came later, meaning from that did Mr. Crispin create this. And this is much, much better is showing each's motivations and desires, history, relationships, making them more intense and less stereotype-y or comical than the movie does. The costumes and effects used for the xeno are also markedly worse off⸻using as if multiple nozzles to drown their heads in what should be saliva, comes off as cartoon-tier sweating, their movements (and numerous camera cuts to clothe how bad it looks in 'action') and bodies look stiff and rubber-y/plastic-y, respectively. Perhaps it was rushed, perhaps money was unwisely spent, or was never enough to begin with.

Very nigga.

P.S. Fuck me, the movie was bad: Ripley looks like an aged skeletor with hair; all interiors are smothered in socialist drabs (brown and gray), whilst also looking decared older than the first Alien movie's; the cast are reduced to one-paragraph memecicles or themself, as if. The weird thing for me is that the novel came later, meaning from that did Mr. Crispin create this. And this is much, much better is showing each's motivations and desires, history, relationships, making them more intense and less stereotype-y or comical than the movie does. The costumes and effects used for the xeno are also markedly worse off⸻using as if multiple nozzles to drown their heads in what should be saliva, comes off as cartoon-tier sweating, their movements (and numerous camera cuts to clothe how bad it looks in 'action') and bodies look stiff and rubber-y/plastic-y, respectively. Perhaps it was rushed, perhaps money was unwisely spent, or was never enough to begin with.

Very nigga.

P.S. Fuck me, the movie was bad: Ripley looks like an aged skeletor with hair; all interiors are smothered in socialist drabs (brown and gray), whilst also looking decared older than the first Alien movie's; the cast are reduced to one-paragraph memecicles or themself, as if. The weird thing for me is that the novel came later, meaning from that did Mr. Crispin create this. And this is much, much better is showing each's motivations and desires, history, relationships, making them more intense and less stereotype-y or comical than the movie does. The costumes and effects used for the xeno are also markedly worse off⸻using as if multiple nozzles to drown their heads in what should be saliva, comes off as cartoon-tier sweating, their movements (and numerous camera cuts to clothe how bad it looks in 'action') and bodies look stiff and rubber-y/plastic-y, respectively. Perhaps it was rushed, perhaps money was unwisely spent, or was never enough to begin with.

Very nigga.

P.S. Fuck me, the movie was bad: Ripley looks like an aged skeletor with hair; all interiors are smothered in socialist drabs (brown and gray), whilst also looking decared older than the first Alien movie's; the cast are reduced to one-paragraph memecicles or themself, as if. The weird thing for me is that the novel came later, meaning from that did Mr. Crispin create this. And this is much, much better is showing each's motivations and desires, history, relationships, making them more intense and less stereotype-y or comical than the movie does. The costumes and effects used for the xeno are also markedly worse off⸻using as if multiple nozzles to drown their heads in what should be saliva, comes off as cartoon-tier sweating, their movements (and numerous camera cuts to clothe how bad it looks in 'action') and bodies look stiff and rubber-y/plastic-y, respectively. Perhaps it was rushed, perhaps money was unwisely spent, or was never enough to begin with.

Very nigga.

P.S. Fuck me, the movie was bad: Ripley looks like an aged skeletor with hair; all interiors are smothered in socialist drabs (brown and gray), whilst also looking decared older than the first Alien movie's; the cast are reduced to one-paragraph memecicles or themself, as if. The weird thing for me is that the novel came later, meaning from that did Mr. Crispin create this. And this is much, much better is showing each's motivations and desires, history, relationships, making them more intense and less stereotype-y or comical than the movie does. The costumes and effects used for the xeno are also markedly worse off⸻using as if multiple nozzles to drown their heads in what should be saliva, comes off as cartoon-tier sweating, their movements (and numerous camera cuts to clothe how bad it looks in 'action') and bodies look stiff and rubber-y/plastic-y, respectively. Perhaps it was rushed, perhaps money was unwisely spent, or was never enough to begin with.

If ever there was a book for me and my oh,-im-so-gay,-i-wanna-foster-goodfaith-and-long-term-commitment-in-people, this'd be it. The unproductive, or otherwise stated, asshole-y, conversational methods, that I employ in real life, and much more so on the internet (evidenced by my 4chan posts and my neocities page) are featured in many a study by Peter Boghossian (et. al.), showing just how futile, counterproductive, and hence profligate, they are. Boghossian is a professor of philosophy, while Lindsay is mathematician-turned-critic-of-Marxism's-newest-development.

The content of this book is platinum-gilded paladium. Written for man, period; not an adjective man, the this/that group. Advice within is wildly sane and applicable to any person with an IQ above ~80 for any conversation. I feel like I should be rereading every chapter, section, paragraph, going outside, and practicing with so-called 'people'. Some of it seems annoying or coddling, but so far with 3 people it has helped, albeit 2 of which were just more productive and not doubt-in-belief-instilling. I'd highly recommend this, and I'll very soon be rereading it.

If ever there was a book for me and my oh,-im-so-gay,-i-wanna-foster-goodfaith-and-long-term-commitment-in-people, this'd be it. The unproductive, or otherwise stated, asshole-y, conversational methods, that I employ in real life, and much more so on the internet (evidenced by my 4chan posts and my neocities page) are featured in many a study by Peter Boghossian (et. al.), showing just how futile, counterproductive, and hence profligate, they are. Boghossian is a professor of philosophy, while Lindsay is mathematician-turned-critic-of-Marxism's-newest-development.

The content of this book is platinum-gilded paladium. Written for man, period; not an adjective man, the this/that group. Advice within is wildly sane and applicable to any person with an IQ above ~80 for any conversation. I feel like I should be rereading every chapter, section, paragraph, going outside, and practicing with so-called 'people'. Some of it seems annoying or coddling, but so far with 3 people it has helped, albeit 2 of which were just more productive and not doubt-in-belief-instilling. I'd highly recommend this, and I'll very soon be rereading it.

If ever there was a book for me and my oh,-im-so-gay,-i-wanna-foster-goodfaith-and-long-term-commitment-in-people, this'd be it. The unproductive, or otherwise stated, asshole-y, conversational methods, that I employ in real life, and much more so on the internet (evidenced by my 4chan posts and my neocities page) are featured in many a study by Peter Boghossian (et. al.), showing just how futile, counterproductive, and hence profligate, they are. Boghossian is a professor of philosophy, while Lindsay is mathematician-turned-critic-of-Marxism's-newest-development.

The content of this book is platinum-gilded paladium. Written for man, period; not an adjective man, the this/that group. Advice within is wildly sane and applicable to any person with an IQ above ~80 for any conversation. I feel like I should be rereading every chapter, section, paragraph, going outside, and practicing with so-called 'people'. Some of it seems annoying or coddling, but so far with 3 people it has helped, albeit 2 of which were just more productive and not doubt-in-belief-instilling. I'd highly recommend this, and I'll very soon be rereading it.

If ever there was a book for me and my oh,-im-so-gay,-i-wanna-foster-goodfaith-and-long-term-commitment-in-people, this'd be it. The unproductive, or otherwise stated, asshole-y, conversational methods, that I employ in real life, and much more so on the internet (evidenced by my 4chan posts and my neocities page) are featured in many a study by Peter Boghossian (et. al.), showing just how futile, counterproductive, and hence profligate, they are. Boghossian is a professor of philosophy, while Lindsay is mathematician-turned-critic-of-Marxism's-newest-development.

The content of this book is platinum-gilded paladium. Written for man, period; not an adjective man, the this/that group. Advice within is wildly sane and applicable to any person with an IQ above ~80 for any conversation. I feel like I should be rereading every chapter, section, paragraph, going outside, and practicing with so-called 'people'. Some of it seems annoying or coddling, but so far with 3 people it has helped, albeit 2 of which were just more productive and not doubt-in-belief-instilling. I'd highly recommend this, and I'll very soon be rereading it.

Concise presentation of the motivations and reasons (again). Ivor Cummins had a great podcast episode with guest Gabor Erdosi, who explained in more detail the virology and biochemistry in the latter half of it, and the chances of it being 'lmao, just nature, lol. accept the bat facts'. This was in March '21.

Having followed the situation in the UK and Ireland with Ivor mostly, little was new to me, information-wise. Reading it in a single sitting⸻well, two actually, since it's so fucking depressing to read what humans do to each other⸻, overextensions and overreachings, double standards, otherings, dehumanizations, privations, economic turmoil, etc., etc., etc., etc. But I did allow me some more perspective of the common man, since I am abnormal in a few ways. Written by a female, it only occasionally juts up, rarely even, she kept her cool and did, lo and behold, actual journalism by talking, inquiring, reading, comparing, etc.

Having followed the situation in the UK and Ireland with Ivor mostly, little was new to me, information-wise. Reading it in a single sitting⸻well, two actually, since it's so fucking depressing to read what humans do to each other⸻, overextensions and overreachings, double standards, otherings, dehumanizations, privations, economic turmoil, etc., etc., etc., etc. But I did allow me some more perspective of the common man, since I am abnormal in a few ways. Written by a female, it only occasionally juts up, rarely even, she kept her cool and did, lo and behold, actual journalism by talking, inquiring, reading, comparing, etc.

Having followed the situation in the UK and Ireland with Ivor mostly, little was new to me, information-wise. Reading it in a single sitting⸻well, two actually, since it's so fucking depressing to read what humans do to each other⸻, overextensions and overreachings, double standards, otherings, dehumanizations, privations, economic turmoil, etc., etc., etc., etc. But I did allow me some more perspective of the common man, since I am abnormal in a few ways. Written by a female, it only occasionally juts up, rarely even, she kept her cool and did, lo and behold, actual journalism by talking, inquiring, reading, comparing, etc.

Novelization of the eponymous video game. My second meeting with Amanda Ripley, daughter of best mommy Ripley, initial being in Sea of Sorrows name-wise only. While the backstory is plausible and fitting, and pleasant enough, the author doesn't explore new grounds, asks no new questions, and, apart from 'what happened with Amanda?', answers no old ones either. Kind of another 'WY bad' book, albeit more of them are, but at least they had some stuffing... I'd only watched a few playthroughs and speedruns of the game, so I was familiar with the architecture, the setting, the plot, the characters. Again, compared to the game, the book did a poor job of describing various structures, whilst providing unnecessary details to other things, like people. The joes were uncanny or sinister enough. sigh If more liberty were taken and he'd strayed a bit from the game, awkward scenes could've tacitly been omitted for the better.

Novelization of the eponymous video game. My second meeting with Amanda Ripley, daughter of best mommy Ripley, initial being in Sea of Sorrows name-wise only. While the backstory is plausible and fitting, and pleasant enough, the author doesn't explore new grounds, asks no new questions, and, apart from 'what happened with Amanda?', answers no old ones either. Kind of another 'WY bad' book, albeit more of them are, but at least they had some stuffing... I'd only watched a few playthroughs and speedruns of the game, so I was familiar with the architecture, the setting, the plot, the characters. Again, compared to the game, the book did a poor job of describing various structures, whilst providing unnecessary details to other things, like people. The joes were uncanny or sinister enough. sigh If more liberty were taken and he'd strayed a bit from the game, awkward scenes could've tacitly been omitted for the better.

Uncle Ted book. Examines the characteristics of successful and un-such revolutions/activist things. Of course, propaganda to a degree, but also an educational handbook for how to organize movements. Although I don't think an anti-tech revolution is ever to happen, since what the fuck is a technology and who fucking decides, and all that jazz, just creates more problems than it solves. And given the problem-solving nature of engineers and scientists all around the world for the last several thousand years, I'm sure that them knocking their head against the reinforced concrete will eventually suggest a weak spot, as it has in the past. Kinda sad to see him citing the same things, it's as if the penitentiary won't lend out books, or inquire for more.

Nice premise for a book: chapter delivery in reverse, that is, reverse chronological plot unvealing. However, it's a fucking woman again and shit revolving around her, her child, and the cucks orbiting this slovenly whore. Fuck you, Deaver.

Nice premise for a book: chapter delivery in reverse, that is, reverse chronological plot unvealing. However, it's a fucking woman again and shit revolving around her, her child, and the cucks orbiting this slovenly whore. Fuck you, Deaver.

Sweet mother of fuck:
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG.
Horrible writing.

How not to tell a story: 1. take your damn-ass time unrolling the exposition with your impotent tiny, gay, woman hands; 2. extend coversations for filler with shit nobody cares about. I was play a game while listening to this, otherwise I'd've launched much sooner. That being said, every minute of the first 1.5h I was reconsidering quitting. This being my second chance to the author of Ghost Virus⸻decent premise, bad execution. This guy is 2 for 2, you could say this is his 'style', unappealing as it may be for me. I'd rather not know how it ends, than have to endure more of this pussyfooting.

How not to tell a story: 1. take your damn-ass time unrolling the exposition with your impotent tiny, gay, woman hands; 2. extend coversations for filler with shit nobody cares about. I was play a game while listening to this, otherwise I'd've launched much sooner. That being said, every minute of the first 1.5h I was reconsidering quitting. This being my second chance to the author of Ghost Virus⸻decent premise, bad execution. This guy is 2 for 2, you could say this is his 'style', unappealing as it may be for me. I'd rather not know how it ends, than have to endure more of this pussyfooting.

How not to tell a story: 1. take your damn-ass time unrolling the exposition with your impotent tiny, gay, woman hands; 2. extend coversations for filler with shit nobody cares about. I was play a game while listening to this, otherwise I'd've launched much sooner. That being said, every minute of the first 1.5h I was reconsidering quitting. This being my second chance to the author of Ghost Virus⸻decent premise, bad execution. This guy is 2 for 2, you could say this is his 'style', unappealing as it may be for me. I'd rather not know how it ends, than have to endure more of this pussyfooting.

How not to tell a story: 1. take your damn-ass time unrolling the exposition with your impotent tiny, gay, woman hands; 2. extend coversations for filler with shit nobody cares about. I was play a game while listening to this, otherwise I'd've launched much sooner. That being said, every minute of the first 1.5h I was reconsidering quitting. This being my second chance to the author of Ghost Virus⸻decent premise, bad execution. This guy is 2 for 2, you could say this is his 'style', unappealing as it may be for me. I'd rather not know how it ends, than have to endure more of this pussyfooting.

How not to tell a story: 1. take your damn-ass time unrolling the exposition with your impotent tiny, gay, woman hands; 2. extend coversations for filler with shit nobody cares about. I was play a game while listening to this, otherwise I'd've launched much sooner. That being said, every minute of the first 1.5h I was reconsidering quitting. This being my second chance to the author of Ghost Virus⸻decent premise, bad execution. This guy is 2 for 2, you could say this is his 'style', unappealing as it may be for me. I'd rather not know how it ends, than have to endure more of this pussyfooting.

How not to tell a story: 1. take your damn-ass time unrolling the exposition with your impotent tiny, gay, woman hands; 2. extend coversations for filler with shit nobody cares about. I was play a game while listening to this, otherwise I'd've launched much sooner. That being said, every minute of the first 1.5h I was reconsidering quitting. This being my second chance to the author of Ghost Virus⸻decent premise, bad execution. This guy is 2 for 2, you could say this is his 'style', unappealing as it may be for me. I'd rather not know how it ends, than have to endure more of this pussyfooting.

How not to tell a story: 1. take your damn-ass time unrolling the exposition with your impotent tiny, gay, woman hands; 2. extend coversations for filler with shit nobody cares about. I was play a game while listening to this, otherwise I'd've launched much sooner. That being said, every minute of the first 1.5h I was reconsidering quitting. This being my second chance to the author of Ghost Virus⸻decent premise, bad execution. This guy is 2 for 2, you could say this is his 'style', unappealing as it may be for me. I'd rather not know how it ends, than have to endure more of this pussyfooting.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

My third book from this dude. Indirectly centered around emotion (and controlling them or making use of them) and, vaguely, a few ideas. All (natural) characters drag mental baggage with every step of the plot, struggling til the end, wherein all is resolved. I find the character all unexceptional, normal, maybe a third of a standard deviation above the nation's average, but certainly not bright. The ideas of both tacit and explicit complicity in 'evil' and 'horrors', of rules, and of overarching, bigger-than-thyself things were well trod. I didn't enjoy the content as fully perhaps because 1. I'm so emotionally distant, or numb, or rational (whatever that means; think the word's lost all meaning nowadays...); 2. Smitherd's vocabulary isn't either well-utilized, or well-suited for horror, or tension: local climax felt improperly heightened/intensified; 3. people.

A wealth of information collated. Book itself slightly bores, given the format of 'year/s relative inc/dec, possible reasons' ad solitum vomitum. Although not presented as such, it well may (help to) explain many a trend in the US, as well as other countries. I'm no statistician, certainly I'm the doing the work of looking up all data sets and seeing if all the controlling supposedly done was proper, but it seems more true than false on most accounts.

A wealth of information collated. Book itself slightly bores, given the format of 'year/s relative inc/dec, possible reasons' ad solitum vomitum. Although not presented as such, it well may (help to) explain many a trend in the US, as well as other countries. I'm no statistician, certainly I'm the doing the work of looking up all data sets and seeing if all the controlling supposedly done was proper, but it seems more true than false on most accounts.

A wealth of information collated. Book itself slightly bores, given the format of 'year/s relative inc/dec, possible reasons' ad solitum vomitum. Although not presented as such, it well may (help to) explain many a trend in the US, as well as other countries. I'm no statistician, certainly I'm the doing the work of looking up all data sets and seeing if all the controlling supposedly done was proper, but it seems more true than false on most accounts.

A wealth of information collated. Book itself slightly bores, given the format of 'year/s relative inc/dec, possible reasons' ad solitum vomitum. Although not presented as such, it well may (help to) explain many a trend in the US, as well as other countries. I'm no statistician, certainly I'm the doing the work of looking up all data sets and seeing if all the controlling supposedly done was proper, but it seems more true than false on most accounts.

A wealth of information collated. Book itself slightly bores, given the format of 'year/s relative inc/dec, possible reasons' ad solitum vomitum. Although not presented as such, it well may (help to) explain many a trend in the US, as well as other countries. I'm no statistician, certainly I'm the doing the work of looking up all data sets and seeing if all the controlling supposedly done was proper, but it seems more true than false on most accounts.

A wealth of information collated. Book itself slightly bores, given the format of 'year/s relative inc/dec, possible reasons' ad solitum vomitum. Although not presented as such, it well may (help to) explain many a trend in the US, as well as other countries. I'm no statistician, certainly I'm the doing the work of looking up all data sets and seeing if all the controlling supposedly done was proper, but it seems more true than false on most accounts.

Wholly missing the point and shilling ineffective, self-destructive politics using faulty, objectively wrong reasoning. Fuck you for ruining the one country that could've be good on this shithole of a planet.

Wholly missing the point and shilling ineffective, self-destructive politics using faulty, objectively wrong reasoning. Fuck you for ruining the one country that could've be good on this shithole of a planet.

Stream-of-consciousness: I'd seen the cover many a time on in /lit/ threads, knew of the style just like 'slam poetry'. Only later did I realize I'd read something similar quite some years back, about a dude that got drunk in a Mexican tavern, went through an attic door inside it, ended up in a whimsical, nonsensical world, that ends up merely a mirror of the real one⸻politics, sex affairs, sexes' affairs, feuds and wars, clashes, revolutions and resolution, youth and senility: same package, different wrapping.In the drinking aspect, Mexican'ness, and partially the writing style, it is similar, although I cannot remember that novel's title (and I checked out all of wikiepdia's novels set in Mexico in addition to 3 other lists). Molloy Samuel Beckett ✔ 1 Extensively rambly, round-about-y, beat-around-the-bush-y, long-sentenced, long-winded, consistently inconsistent, on the fence and unsure. Even more stream of consciousness than By Night in Chile or Under the Volcano. It reads something like seventy-two village idiots, drunks, or towncriers unfurling the selfsame story, incessantly interrupting each other soon as present storyteller's fire suffocates, continuing? No, beginning anew, but you, you're sitting there, soaking in this man's story, unsure if it's one or all of them, you initially wanted to hear the ending, want him to get to the point, the crux, the resolution, any form of progression. I love it. Circles around? I love it. Also, writing a months or two after completion, it reminds also of

Stream-of-consciousness: I'd seen the cover many a time on in /lit/ threads, knew of the style just like 'slam poetry'. Only later did I realize I'd read something similar quite some years back, about a dude that got drunk in a Mexican tavern, went through an attic door inside it, ended up in a whimsical, nonsensical world, that ends up merely a mirror of the real one⸻politics, sex affairs, sexes' affairs, feuds and wars, clashes, revolutions and resolution, youth and senility: same package, different wrapping.In the drinking aspect, Mexican'ness, and partially the writing style, it is similar, although I cannot remember that novel's title (and I checked out all of wikiepdia's novels set in Mexico in addition to 3 other lists). Molloy Samuel Beckett ✔ 1 Extensively rambly, round-about-y, beat-around-the-bush-y, long-sentenced, long-winded, consistently inconsistent, on the fence and unsure. Even more stream of consciousness than By Night in Chile or Under the Volcano. It reads something like seventy-two village idiots, drunks, or towncriers unfurling the selfsame story, incessantly interrupting each other soon as present storyteller's fire suffocates, continuing? No, beginning anew, but you, you're sitting there, soaking in this man's story, unsure if it's one or all of them, you initially wanted to hear the ending, want him to get to the point, the crux, the resolution, any form of progression. I love it. Circles around? I love it. Also, writing a months or two after completion, it reminds also of

Stream-of-consciousness: I'd seen the cover many a time on in /lit/ threads, knew of the style just like 'slam poetry'. Only later did I realize I'd read something similar quite some years back, about a dude that got drunk in a Mexican tavern, went through an attic door inside it, ended up in a whimsical, nonsensical world, that ends up merely a mirror of the real one⸻politics, sex affairs, sexes' affairs, feuds and wars, clashes, revolutions and resolution, youth and senility: same package, different wrapping.In the drinking aspect, Mexican'ness, and partially the writing style, it is similar, although I cannot remember that novel's title (and I checked out all of wikiepdia's novels set in Mexico in addition to 3 other lists). Molloy Samuel Beckett ✔ 1 Extensively rambly, round-about-y, beat-around-the-bush-y, long-sentenced, long-winded, consistently inconsistent, on the fence and unsure. Even more stream of consciousness than By Night in Chile or Under the Volcano. It reads something like seventy-two village idiots, drunks, or towncriers unfurling the selfsame story, incessantly interrupting each other soon as present storyteller's fire suffocates, continuing? No, beginning anew, but you, you're sitting there, soaking in this man's story, unsure if it's one or all of them, you initially wanted to hear the ending, want him to get to the point, the crux, the resolution, any form of progression. I love it. Circles around? I love it. Also, writing a months or two after completion, it reminds also of

Stream-of-consciousness: I'd seen the cover many a time on in /lit/ threads, knew of the style just like 'slam poetry'. Only later did I realize I'd read something similar quite some years back, about a dude that got drunk in a Mexican tavern, went through an attic door inside it, ended up in a whimsical, nonsensical world, that ends up merely a mirror of the real one⸻politics, sex affairs, sexes' affairs, feuds and wars, clashes, revolutions and resolution, youth and senility: same package, different wrapping.In the drinking aspect, Mexican'ness, and partially the writing style, it is similar, although I cannot remember that novel's title (and I checked out all of wikiepdia's novels set in Mexico in addition to 3 other lists). Molloy Samuel Beckett ✔ 1 Extensively rambly, round-about-y, beat-around-the-bush-y, long-sentenced, long-winded, consistently inconsistent, on the fence and unsure. Even more stream of consciousness than By Night in Chile or Under the Volcano. It reads something like seventy-two village idiots, drunks, or towncriers unfurling the selfsame story, incessantly interrupting each other soon as present storyteller's fire suffocates, continuing? No, beginning anew, but you, you're sitting there, soaking in this man's story, unsure if it's one or all of them, you initially wanted to hear the ending, want him to get to the point, the crux, the resolution, any form of progression. I love it. Circles around? I love it. Also, writing a months or two after completion, it reminds also of

The dystopian future isn't a future. It's has been happening for at least years already. And it's being legalized, uncontensted, unprostested, even accepted, in most of the rest of world: North and South American, Europe, Asia, Oceania (Africa has other problems on its hands). Since some 2e8 weren't enough, let's see if just how many really have to die to get there⸻the no place. A must-read.

The dystopian future isn't a future. It's has been happening for at least years already. And it's being legalized, uncontensted, unprostested, even accepted, in most of the rest of world: North and South American, Europe, Asia, Oceania (Africa has other problems on its hands). Since some 2e8 weren't enough, let's see if just how many really have to die to get there⸻the no place. A must-read.

The dystopian future isn't a future. It's has been happening for at least years already. And it's being legalized, uncontensted, unprostested, even accepted, in most of the rest of world: North and South American, Europe, Asia, Oceania (Africa has other problems on its hands). Since some 2e8 weren't enough, let's see if just how many really have to die to get there⸻the no place. A must-read.

The dystopian future isn't a future. It's has been happening for at least years already. And it's being legalized, uncontensted, unprostested, even accepted, in most of the rest of world: North and South American, Europe, Asia, Oceania (Africa has other problems on its hands). Since some 2e8 weren't enough, let's see if just how many really have to die to get there⸻the no place. A must-read.

The dystopian future isn't a future. It's has been happening for at least years already. And it's being legalized, uncontensted, unprostested, even accepted, in most of the rest of world: North and South American, Europe, Asia, Oceania (Africa has other problems on its hands). Since some 2e8 weren't enough, let's see if just how many really have to die to get there⸻the no place. A must-read.

The dystopian future isn't a future. It's has been happening for at least years already. And it's being legalized, uncontensted, unprostested, even accepted, in most of the rest of world: North and South American, Europe, Asia, Oceania (Africa has other problems on its hands). Since some 2e8 weren't enough, let's see if just how many really have to die to get there⸻the no place. A must-read.

The dystopian future isn't a future. It's has been happening for at least years already. And it's being legalized, uncontensted, unprostested, even accepted, in most of the rest of world: North and South American, Europe, Asia, Oceania (Africa has other problems on its hands). Since some 2e8 weren't enough, let's see if just how many really have to die to get there⸻the no place. A must-read.

The book very lighty explores these themes: race, guilt, duty, respect, entertaining of ideas; sex and love and trustfulness some. I don't know if on purpose, but the future written is filled with misinformation, agenda about the environment, energy and various matters pertaining the that, hence the G.

The book very lighty explores these themes: race, guilt, duty, respect, entertaining of ideas; sex and love and trustfulness some. I don't know if on purpose, but the future written is filled with misinformation, agenda about the environment, energy and various matters pertaining the that, hence the G.

The book very lighty explores these themes: race, guilt, duty, respect, entertaining of ideas; sex and love and trustfulness some. I don't know if on purpose, but the future written is filled with misinformation, agenda about the environment, energy and various matters pertaining the that, hence the G.

The book very lighty explores these themes: race, guilt, duty, respect, entertaining of ideas; sex and love and trustfulness some. I don't know if on purpose, but the future written is filled with misinformation, agenda about the environment, energy and various matters pertaining the that, hence the G.

The book very lighty explores these themes: race, guilt, duty, respect, entertaining of ideas; sex and love and trustfulness some. I don't know if on purpose, but the future written is filled with misinformation, agenda about the environment, energy and various matters pertaining the that, hence the G.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

Over the past week I had heard references to both Neil Howe and the 'fourth turning', so I looked into it. Written in '97. In the introduction both authors are oblivious or could not have then named the Marxist forces behind the show, which makes for an innocently neutral look on the (then) present.

I've seen author's name a few times only, I now see why. His work regards child exploitation and pornography, and sexual deviancy, depravity, deformation, and degeneracy in a rapid-fire onslaught of brutality that you can't easily sell to 99.9% of readers. The work is divvied into sections A through G, each pertaining to 1 or more real-world, (un-)solved crimes in America of violent and sexual nature, with questions asked by some combination of an attorney, a psychologist, and a female magazine contributor, then answered by the⸻and I'm guessing here, since some, if not all, the crimes are unresolved⸻, criminals, that is, Sotos himself, using appropriate language throughout. On that note, I know nothing of this man: he writes on this topic exclusively, is handled by small publishers with few prints and often in scant quantities and editions, literally only Pornography is to be found readily online, containing 5 'novels' of his from '91⸺00, this being the first of the lot. I quite enjoyed the style, the brutality, and I think he did a few good job at trying to get into the heads of such individuals, I don't know how or why, but I would like to know. I'm actually considering dropping real money on this guy, but I really do not want to deal with physical media.

More an alternative history novel, wherein NatSoc Germany 'wins' WWII, than a detective one, with the majority of the plot focus on events that took place. Eerily similar to present day China and its Uyghurs, or post-revolution Russian. In real life, national socialism's and fascism's apparent mogging of everything attempted in the East (bolshevism, menshevism, leninism, trotskyism, communism, stalinism, socialism, maoism, juche, aaand so on), I think, is due to both nations' prosperity beforehand (compared to despotic, feudalistic states) rather than the ideology, and certainly not any latent demographic superiority (the amount of decent to good or great citizen expelled, expropriated, or exterminated German citizens, let alone the conquereds' ones could have been used for the good of the many⸻instead potential was lost, for the worse of all). Does the ideas of national socialism justice in presenting them honestly, and American leftists' flirtations with them. A nice book on totalitarianism and authoritarianism.

More an alternative history novel, wherein NatSoc Germany 'wins' WWII, than a detective one, with the majority of the plot focus on events that took place. Eerily similar to present day China and its Uyghurs, or post-revolution Russian. In real life, national socialism's and fascism's apparent mogging of everything attempted in the East (bolshevism, menshevism, leninism, trotskyism, communism, stalinism, socialism, maoism, juche, aaand so on), I think, is due to both nations' prosperity beforehand (compared to despotic, feudalistic states) rather than the ideology, and certainly not any latent demographic superiority (the amount of decent to good or great citizen expelled, expropriated, or exterminated German citizens, let alone the conquereds' ones could have been used for the good of the many⸻instead potential was lost, for the worse of all). Does the ideas of national socialism justice in presenting them honestly, and American leftists' flirtations with them. A nice book on totalitarianism and authoritarianism.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

Yet another touch upon the ideal-for-a-scapegoat idea explored in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, or 1 or 2. Arguably, Huxley's Brave New World and⸻,wait a sec, this has remained unfinished quite a bit 20211221⸺20220212, anyways, it was fine.

The other book I did on Gacy went into detail criminal and or deviant aspects followed by dull milksop. This one, however, portrays a human being, presents a whole lost that had being covered by attorney-client privilege, but that Gacy wanted eventually told by said attorney, the author. Interesting character study, characters. Good read.

So, second book around, The Golden Apple of the Illumiunatus! trilo, references haven't been eluding me as much, and I've also attempted to acquire any other readables. Well, this is one of them, so I read it. Context matters a lot in history, and this cunt's life and years before that were filled with happenings, that aren't what I came for, aren't debauchery, perversion, ruination, etc. It was interesting, but I also have a hard time keeping track of many, isonomic or similarly enough named people. The interpretations are interesting and would warrant some thought, but as a book it's not great, nor as a textbook, it reads like an long essay.

So, second book around, The Golden Apple of the Illumiunatus! trilo, references haven't been eluding me as much, and I've also attempted to acquire any other readables. Well, this is one of them, so I read it. Context matters a lot in history, and this cunt's life and years before that were filled with happenings, that aren't what I came for, aren't debauchery, perversion, ruination, etc. It was interesting, but I also have a hard time keeping track of many, isonomic or similarly enough named people. The interpretations are interesting and would warrant some thought, but as a book it's not great, nor as a textbook, it reads like an long essay.

An Arctic station full of brilliant female scientists⸻yeah, right⸻who inevitably fuck up everything⸻ok, hauling ass back to reality. Boring backstories of the uncredible 'people' there, every 1⸺2 chapters are cramming unneeded, unwanted information about unlikeables, telling, not showing, whilst also fucking up the suspense curve, which is wrong for the whole fucking book. The present-day part you can foretell wholly, just bad writing everywhere, not a single thing done properly. The idea of the novel is almost passable, but its gradual turn to schlock, (bad) cheese, and (ill executed) clichés made for just more disappointment.

My second read, first being the in-the-foreword-somewhat-beshaded one, translated by Stuart Gilbert some years ago. I have both copies, and I compared a few pages. Although I prefer this one's wording and vocabulary, the discrepancies are subtle. The book itself is one I take to heart, about acceptance, about the absurdity of life, of things happening and us going along with them, about shit happening. Could have been of a person doing the exact opposite and likewise caring little.

Useful knowledge if you have to time to study the people, or have recordings of them, or good photographic memory. Some of information is obviously biased and or false/outdated, and I think the author has left omit a not insignificant of failures and embarrassments for himself and his agency. A nice read nonetheless, if one's collating such information from other sources.

Useful knowledge if you have to time to study the people, or have recordings of them, or good photographic memory. Some of information is obviously biased and or false/outdated, and I think the author has left omit a not insignificant of failures and embarrassments for himself and his agency. A nice read nonetheless, if one's collating such information from other sources.

Useful knowledge if you have to time to study the people, or have recordings of them, or good photographic memory. Some of information is obviously biased and or false/outdated, and I think the author has left omit a not insignificant of failures and embarrassments for himself and his agency. A nice read nonetheless, if one's collating such information from other sources.

A tribute to 80s horror/gore flicks à la Cannibal Holocaust. Suspense-release-wise, it does very well, taking many hints from 1987's movie Predator. People die, well, they all die, but it's satisfying most often, not cheap, and all people seem reasonably plausible. Short and sweet, like his other novels.

A tribute to 80s horror/gore flicks à la Cannibal Holocaust. Suspense-release-wise, it does very well, taking many hints from 1987's movie Predator. People die, well, they all die, but it's satisfying most often, not cheap, and all people seem reasonably plausible. Short and sweet, like his other novels.

Uuuh, David Cage's Detroit: Become Human much? However, this was released 2 years prior thereto, and it's actually good, specifically by not ham-fisting you another's childish moral views via falsely dichotomous good/evil choices. I think, Cage may in bulk buy books, written by indie, unknown, and or new authors, for the total price less than that of a single one by a mediocrely known author. He'd go through them until an idea grabs him, after which he'd do minor alterations to fit his worldview and wa la, a David Cage cage.

Most of Jon Athan's works reside around 40k words, this being one of the very few going to 55k, however, it suffers a few problem. Namely, the harried second half or second and third thirds, leaving no room for showing or telling, character development⸻you could say, these are androids and this is the future, hence rumination would be a calculation, possibly a recheck at a later time, no 'sleeping on it'. Bladerunner 2077 asks/challenges some of the same or similar enough questions/ideas, as does Cage's Detroit, albeit poorly, but the former's pacing is spot-on, latter's⸻goes from okay, to bad, to wtf?. Otherwise, a great read.

9 Months Trilogy Matt Shaw mpw .54 This Is My Funniest: 1 V.A., Mike Resnick (ed.) ✓ 1 Hardwired: 2 - Voice of the Whirlwind Walter Jon Williams mb .06 Naked Statues, Fat Gladiators, and War Elephants Garrett Ryan m 1.15 No Place to Go: How Public Toilets Fail Our Private Needs Lezlie Lowe ♀gm .22 Tesla Prime and the Regulus Event Douglas Equils wpm .54 Effacement Hieronymus Hawkes wm .25 Lincoln in the Bardo George Saunders W .06 People Who Eat Darkness Richard Lloyd Parry mbpa .91 Written by a journalist, you can tell, it's fairly biased. It came in an ~ 13 hour audiobook, often void of critical or crucial information, requiring >3.5x listening speed. Didn't warrant reading, because it's shit. More than half the words are inconsequential, personal tragedy made into milksop, i.e., filler. Information of about the guy is the most interesting, but it comes too late, you're already tired of this shit and just want to get over with it.

Uuuh, David Cage's Detroit: Become Human much? However, this was released 2 years prior thereto, and it's actually good, specifically by not ham-fisting you another's childish moral views via falsely dichotomous good/evil choices. I think, Cage may in bulk buy books, written by indie, unknown, and or new authors, for the total price less than that of a single one by a mediocrely known author. He'd go through them until an idea grabs him, after which he'd do minor alterations to fit his worldview and wa la, a David Cage cage.

Most of Jon Athan's works reside around 40k words, this being one of the very few going to 55k, however, it suffers a few problem. Namely, the harried second half or second and third thirds, leaving no room for showing or telling, character development⸻you could say, these are androids and this is the future, hence rumination would be a calculation, possibly a recheck at a later time, no 'sleeping on it'. Bladerunner 2077 asks/challenges some of the same or similar enough questions/ideas, as does Cage's Detroit, albeit poorly, but the former's pacing is spot-on, latter's⸻goes from okay, to bad, to wtf?. Otherwise, a great read.

9 Months Trilogy Matt Shaw mpw .54 This Is My Funniest: 1 V.A., Mike Resnick (ed.) ✓ 1 Hardwired: 2 - Voice of the Whirlwind Walter Jon Williams mb .06 Naked Statues, Fat Gladiators, and War Elephants Garrett Ryan m 1.15 No Place to Go: How Public Toilets Fail Our Private Needs Lezlie Lowe ♀gm .22 Tesla Prime and the Regulus Event Douglas Equils wpm .54 Effacement Hieronymus Hawkes wm .25 Lincoln in the Bardo George Saunders W .06 People Who Eat Darkness Richard Lloyd Parry mbpa .91 Written by a journalist, you can tell, it's fairly biased. It came in an ~ 13 hour audiobook, often void of critical or crucial information, requiring >3.5x listening speed. Didn't warrant reading, because it's shit. More than half the words are inconsequential, personal tragedy made into milksop, i.e., filler. Information of about the guy is the most interesting, but it comes too late, you're already tired of this shit and just want to get over with it.

Uuuh, David Cage's Detroit: Become Human much? However, this was released 2 years prior thereto, and it's actually good, specifically by not ham-fisting you another's childish moral views via falsely dichotomous good/evil choices. I think, Cage may in bulk buy books, written by indie, unknown, and or new authors, for the total price less than that of a single one by a mediocrely known author. He'd go through them until an idea grabs him, after which he'd do minor alterations to fit his worldview and wa la, a David Cage cage.

Most of Jon Athan's works reside around 40k words, this being one of the very few going to 55k, however, it suffers a few problem. Namely, the harried second half or second and third thirds, leaving no room for showing or telling, character development⸻you could say, these are androids and this is the future, hence rumination would be a calculation, possibly a recheck at a later time, no 'sleeping on it'. Bladerunner 2077 asks/challenges some of the same or similar enough questions/ideas, as does Cage's Detroit, albeit poorly, but the former's pacing is spot-on, latter's⸻goes from okay, to bad, to wtf?. Otherwise, a great read.

9 Months Trilogy Matt Shaw mpw .54 This Is My Funniest: 1 V.A., Mike Resnick (ed.) ✓ 1 Hardwired: 2 - Voice of the Whirlwind Walter Jon Williams mb .06 Naked Statues, Fat Gladiators, and War Elephants Garrett Ryan m 1.15 No Place to Go: How Public Toilets Fail Our Private Needs Lezlie Lowe ♀gm .22 Tesla Prime and the Regulus Event Douglas Equils wpm .54 Effacement Hieronymus Hawkes wm .25 Lincoln in the Bardo George Saunders W .06 People Who Eat Darkness Richard Lloyd Parry mbpa .91 Written by a journalist, you can tell, it's fairly biased. It came in an ~ 13 hour audiobook, often void of critical or crucial information, requiring >3.5x listening speed. Didn't warrant reading, because it's shit. More than half the words are inconsequential, personal tragedy made into milksop, i.e., filler. Information of about the guy is the most interesting, but it comes too late, you're already tired of this shit and just want to get over with it.

Uuuh, David Cage's Detroit: Become Human much? However, this was released 2 years prior thereto, and it's actually good, specifically by not ham-fisting you another's childish moral views via falsely dichotomous good/evil choices. I think, Cage may in bulk buy books, written by indie, unknown, and or new authors, for the total price less than that of a single one by a mediocrely known author. He'd go through them until an idea grabs him, after which he'd do minor alterations to fit his worldview and wa la, a David Cage cage.

Most of Jon Athan's works reside around 40k words, this being one of the very few going to 55k, however, it suffers a few problem. Namely, the harried second half or second and third thirds, leaving no room for showing or telling, character development⸻you could say, these are androids and this is the future, hence rumination would be a calculation, possibly a recheck at a later time, no 'sleeping on it'. Bladerunner 2077 asks/challenges some of the same or similar enough questions/ideas, as does Cage's Detroit, albeit poorly, but the former's pacing is spot-on, latter's⸻goes from okay, to bad, to wtf?. Otherwise, a great read.

9 Months Trilogy Matt Shaw mpw .54 This Is My Funniest: 1 V.A., Mike Resnick (ed.) ✓ 1 Hardwired: 2 - Voice of the Whirlwind Walter Jon Williams mb .06 Naked Statues, Fat Gladiators, and War Elephants Garrett Ryan m 1.15 No Place to Go: How Public Toilets Fail Our Private Needs Lezlie Lowe ♀gm .22 Tesla Prime and the Regulus Event Douglas Equils wpm .54 Effacement Hieronymus Hawkes wm .25 Lincoln in the Bardo George Saunders W .06 People Who Eat Darkness Richard Lloyd Parry mbpa .91 Written by a journalist, you can tell, it's fairly biased. It came in an ~ 13 hour audiobook, often void of critical or crucial information, requiring >3.5x listening speed. Didn't warrant reading, because it's shit. More than half the words are inconsequential, personal tragedy made into milksop, i.e., filler. Information of about the guy is the most interesting, but it comes too late, you're already tired of this shit and just want to get over with it.

Historical fiction well done. Even though the writer is a woman⸻seriously, though, what the fuck, Baltic countries? You call those names?⸻, bad tropes of (present-day) female writing lack, leaving but a small bearing of romance and (over-)dramatization around the climax. The level of accuracy struck me, left me convinced half the book, I was reading a novelized autobiographical work, i.e., sth of a 49-year-old Romanian male. Welp, no, but her research was either very fruitful or he childhood in communistic L. and USSR day has made concrete the austerity of Marxism-based movements.

Just like Darkness Before Noon, though more detailed in the mundanity (mundaneness may beshade Danes?) and grayness, stresses, fears, hopes, disappointments, and minute comforts of daily life, a vivid picture of the persons' lives is painted. I can appreciate how various characters' points of view contrast, depending on their end-goals and knowledge, and omissions, bringing nuance. The book jacket is all the summary you're going to need. No information is prerequisite, and not much action happens, or characters to keep track of, though you need only multiply the boy's, experience permuting lightly, by the whole population of Romania. A damn fine, serious, short read.

Historical fiction well done. Even though the writer is a woman⸻seriously, though, what the fuck, Baltic countries? You call those names?⸻, bad tropes of (present-day) female writing lack, leaving but a small bearing of romance and (over-)dramatization around the climax. The level of accuracy struck me, left me convinced half the book, I was reading a novelized autobiographical work, i.e., sth of a 49-year-old Romanian male. Welp, no, but her research was either very fruitful or he childhood in communistic L. and USSR day has made concrete the austerity of Marxism-based movements.

Just like Darkness Before Noon, though more detailed in the mundanity (mundaneness may beshade Danes?) and grayness, stresses, fears, hopes, disappointments, and minute comforts of daily life, a vivid picture of the persons' lives is painted. I can appreciate how various characters' points of view contrast, depending on their end-goals and knowledge, and omissions, bringing nuance. The book jacket is all the summary you're going to need. No information is prerequisite, and not much action happens, or characters to keep track of, though you need only multiply the boy's, experience permuting lightly, by the whole population of Romania. A damn fine, serious, short read.

Historical fiction well done. Even though the writer is a woman⸻seriously, though, what the fuck, Baltic countries? You call those names?⸻, bad tropes of (present-day) female writing lack, leaving but a small bearing of romance and (over-)dramatization around the climax. The level of accuracy struck me, left me convinced half the book, I was reading a novelized autobiographical work, i.e., sth of a 49-year-old Romanian male. Welp, no, but her research was either very fruitful or he childhood in communistic L. and USSR day has made concrete the austerity of Marxism-based movements.

Just like Darkness Before Noon, though more detailed in the mundanity (mundaneness may beshade Danes?) and grayness, stresses, fears, hopes, disappointments, and minute comforts of daily life, a vivid picture of the persons' lives is painted. I can appreciate how various characters' points of view contrast, depending on their end-goals and knowledge, and omissions, bringing nuance. The book jacket is all the summary you're going to need. No information is prerequisite, and not much action happens, or characters to keep track of, though you need only multiply the boy's, experience permuting lightly, by the whole population of Romania. A damn fine, serious, short read.

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

In the very beginning of the book, when describing the bomb shelters' peoples' differing fears and practices, either of which unsubstantiated and or unreasonable, I was reminded of SARS-CoV2's shits⸻double-, no triple-mask! cloth! no, pvc! 1.5m! 1m! 3m! and so on and so forth; Funny how irrational stupid, content people become always. Anyway, listening through

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Lady's done her job quite well researching Latin sources, constructing an authentic, grandiose tower from which one sees into some 21 centuries backs with quite vivid everything. Quite long though, and goes into historical details I couldn't give a mite's ass about.

Teddy K.'s magnum fucking opus. This being my 2. or 3. reread, I'd like to make some comments: Reads not at all like ideological merry-go-round drivel unlike some later works, but as an essay: claims are stated, argumented, exemplified. Barely does it read like a manifesto, especially for '95.

The name I find inapt, because it may well be argued that first-world countries are currently in the 'information age', that, or the later stages of the instustrial one scarcely resemble the fuliginously heavy-metal-laden, child-laboring, befactoried one of the 18. and 19. centuries. Yes, you could say we've exported all that to⸻and are hence exploiting⸻ 'lesser' countries, but that'd be wrong on a few levels. And, unless we need more time, the predictions about its 'future' are yet to happen, albeit I can't wait 'centuries' alive. Published in 1995, it has turned out as increasing, exceptionally correct in its observations on what it therein describes as 'lefties' and 'leftism' trait-, tendency/behavior-, motivation-wise; on some of the shortcomings of conservatives, and on the problems of the most technologically developed societies. It walks and talks like a harsh criticism with only a vague attempt at a solution. It also suffers from two of the problems that all Marxism-derived movements/ideologies/things share, namely, one, that it doesn't know how (the thing will happen; how we'll get to the utopia), and, two, that not all is clearly defined (what is technology, who gets to define it, why centralize?). He speaks of pre-industrial societies, namely tribal nomadic ones, or or pre-feudal village ones. But who's to say a bow or a wheel or fire aren't technology..? Perhaps I shouldn't be critiquing this as if it were is crowning work, The Anti-Tech Revolution... That had it's own issues, which I'll address on a future reread. For now though, this is a concentrated acid.

Teddy K.'s magnum fucking opus. This being my 2. or 3. reread, I'd like to make some comments: Reads not at all like ideological merry-go-round drivel unlike some later works, but as an essay: claims are stated, argumented, exemplified. Barely does it read like a manifesto, especially for '95.

The name I find inapt, because it may well be argued that first-world countries are currently in the 'information age', that, or the later stages of the instustrial one scarcely resemble the fuliginously heavy-metal-laden, child-laboring, befactoried one of the 18. and 19. centuries. Yes, you could say we've exported all that to⸻and are hence exploiting⸻ 'lesser' countries, but that'd be wrong on a few levels. And, unless we need more time, the predictions about its 'future' are yet to happen, albeit I can't wait 'centuries' alive. Published in 1995, it has turned out as increasing, exceptionally correct in its observations on what it therein describes as 'lefties' and 'leftism' trait-, tendency/behavior-, motivation-wise; on some of the shortcomings of conservatives, and on the problems of the most technologically developed societies. It walks and talks like a harsh criticism with only a vague attempt at a solution. It also suffers from two of the problems that all Marxism-derived movements/ideologies/things share, namely, one, that it doesn't know how (the thing will happen; how we'll get to the utopia), and, two, that not all is clearly defined (what is technology, who gets to define it, why centralize?). He speaks of pre-industrial societies, namely tribal nomadic ones, or or pre-feudal village ones. But who's to say a bow or a wheel or fire aren't technology..? Perhaps I shouldn't be critiquing this as if it were is crowning work, The Anti-Tech Revolution... That had it's own issues, which I'll address on a future reread. For now though, this is a concentrated acid.

Teddy K.'s magnum fucking opus. This being my 2. or 3. reread, I'd like to make some comments: Reads not at all like ideological merry-go-round drivel unlike some later works, but as an essay: claims are stated, argumented, exemplified. Barely does it read like a manifesto, especially for '95.

The name I find inapt, because it may well be argued that first-world countries are currently in the 'information age', that, or the later stages of the instustrial one scarcely resemble the fuliginously heavy-metal-laden, child-laboring, befactoried one of the 18. and 19. centuries. Yes, you could say we've exported all that to⸻and are hence exploiting⸻ 'lesser' countries, but that'd be wrong on a few levels. And, unless we need more time, the predictions about its 'future' are yet to happen, albeit I can't wait 'centuries' alive. Published in 1995, it has turned out as increasing, exceptionally correct in its observations on what it therein describes as 'lefties' and 'leftism' trait-, tendency/behavior-, motivation-wise; on some of the shortcomings of conservatives, and on the problems of the most technologically developed societies. It walks and talks like a harsh criticism with only a vague attempt at a solution. It also suffers from two of the problems that all Marxism-derived movements/ideologies/things share, namely, one, that it doesn't know how (the thing will happen; how we'll get to the utopia), and, two, that not all is clearly defined (what is technology, who gets to define it, why centralize?). He speaks of pre-industrial societies, namely tribal nomadic ones, or or pre-feudal village ones. But who's to say a bow or a wheel or fire aren't technology..? Perhaps I shouldn't be critiquing this as if it were is crowning work, The Anti-Tech Revolution... That had it's own issues, which I'll address on a future reread. For now though, this is a concentrated acid.

Teddy K.'s magnum fucking opus. This being my 2. or 3. reread, I'd like to make some comments: Reads not at all like ideological merry-go-round drivel unlike some later works, but as an essay: claims are stated, argumented, exemplified. Barely does it read like a manifesto, especially for '95.

The name I find inapt, because it may well be argued that first-world countries are currently in the 'information age', that, or the later stages of the instustrial one scarcely resemble the fuliginously heavy-metal-laden, child-laboring, befactoried one of the 18. and 19. centuries. Yes, you could say we've exported all that to⸻and are hence exploiting⸻ 'lesser' countries, but that'd be wrong on a few levels. And, unless we need more time, the predictions about its 'future' are yet to happen, albeit I can't wait 'centuries' alive. Published in 1995, it has turned out as increasing, exceptionally correct in its observations on what it therein describes as 'lefties' and 'leftism' trait-, tendency/behavior-, motivation-wise; on some of the shortcomings of conservatives, and on the problems of the most technologically developed societies. It walks and talks like a harsh criticism with only a vague attempt at a solution. It also suffers from two of the problems that all Marxism-derived movements/ideologies/things share, namely, one, that it doesn't know how (the thing will happen; how we'll get to the utopia), and, two, that not all is clearly defined (what is technology, who gets to define it, why centralize?). He speaks of pre-industrial societies, namely tribal nomadic ones, or or pre-feudal village ones. But who's to say a bow or a wheel or fire aren't technology..? Perhaps I shouldn't be critiquing this as if it were is crowning work, The Anti-Tech Revolution... That had it's own issues, which I'll address on a future reread. For now though, this is a concentrated acid.

Teddy K.'s magnum fucking opus. This being my 2. or 3. reread, I'd like to make some comments: Reads not at all like ideological merry-go-round drivel unlike some later works, but as an essay: claims are stated, argumented, exemplified. Barely does it read like a manifesto, especially for '95.

The name I find inapt, because it may well be argued that first-world countries are currently in the 'information age', that, or the later stages of the instustrial one scarcely resemble the fuliginously heavy-metal-laden, child-laboring, befactoried one of the 18. and 19. centuries. Yes, you could say we've exported all that to⸻and are hence exploiting⸻ 'lesser' countries, but that'd be wrong on a few levels. And, unless we need more time, the predictions about its 'future' are yet to happen, albeit I can't wait 'centuries' alive. Published in 1995, it has turned out as increasing, exceptionally correct in its observations on what it therein describes as 'lefties' and 'leftism' trait-, tendency/behavior-, motivation-wise; on some of the shortcomings of conservatives, and on the problems of the most technologically developed societies. It walks and talks like a harsh criticism with only a vague attempt at a solution. It also suffers from two of the problems that all Marxism-derived movements/ideologies/things share, namely, one, that it doesn't know how (the thing will happen; how we'll get to the utopia), and, two, that not all is clearly defined (what is technology, who gets to define it, why centralize?). He speaks of pre-industrial societies, namely tribal nomadic ones, or or pre-feudal village ones. But who's to say a bow or a wheel or fire aren't technology..? Perhaps I shouldn't be critiquing this as if it were is crowning work, The Anti-Tech Revolution... That had it's own issues, which I'll address on a future reread. For now though, this is a concentrated acid.

Teddy K.'s magnum fucking opus. This being my 2. or 3. reread, I'd like to make some comments: Reads not at all like ideological merry-go-round drivel unlike some later works, but as an essay: claims are stated, argumented, exemplified. Barely does it read like a manifesto, especially for '95.

The name I find inapt, because it may well be argued that first-world countries are currently in the 'information age', that, or the later stages of the instustrial one scarcely resemble the fuliginously heavy-metal-laden, child-laboring, befactoried one of the 18. and 19. centuries. Yes, you could say we've exported all that to⸻and are hence exploiting⸻ 'lesser' countries, but that'd be wrong on a few levels. And, unless we need more time, the predictions about its 'future' are yet to happen, albeit I can't wait 'centuries' alive. Published in 1995, it has turned out as increasing, exceptionally correct in its observations on what it therein describes as 'lefties' and 'leftism' trait-, tendency/behavior-, motivation-wise; on some of the shortcomings of conservatives, and on the problems of the most technologically developed societies. It walks and talks like a harsh criticism with only a vague attempt at a solution. It also suffers from two of the problems that all Marxism-derived movements/ideologies/things share, namely, one, that it doesn't know how (the thing will happen; how we'll get to the utopia), and, two, that not all is clearly defined (what is technology, who gets to define it, why centralize?). He speaks of pre-industrial societies, namely tribal nomadic ones, or or pre-feudal village ones. But who's to say a bow or a wheel or fire aren't technology..? Perhaps I shouldn't be critiquing this as if it were is crowning work, The Anti-Tech Revolution... That had it's own issues, which I'll address on a future reread. For now though, this is a concentrated acid.

Teddy K.'s magnum fucking opus. This being my 2. or 3. reread, I'd like to make some comments: Reads not at all like ideological merry-go-round drivel unlike some later works, but as an essay: claims are stated, argumented, exemplified. Barely does it read like a manifesto, especially for '95.

The name I find inapt, because it may well be argued that first-world countries are currently in the 'information age', that, or the later stages of the instustrial one scarcely resemble the fuliginously heavy-metal-laden, child-laboring, befactoried one of the 18. and 19. centuries. Yes, you could say we've exported all that to⸻and are hence exploiting⸻ 'lesser' countries, but that'd be wrong on a few levels. And, unless we need more time, the predictions about its 'future' are yet to happen, albeit I can't wait 'centuries' alive. Published in 1995, it has turned out as increasing, exceptionally correct in its observations on what it therein describes as 'lefties' and 'leftism' trait-, tendency/behavior-, motivation-wise; on some of the shortcomings of conservatives, and on the problems of the most technologically developed societies. It walks and talks like a harsh criticism with only a vague attempt at a solution. It also suffers from two of the problems that all Marxism-derived movements/ideologies/things share, namely, one, that it doesn't know how (the thing will happen; how we'll get to the utopia), and, two, that not all is clearly defined (what is technology, who gets to define it, why centralize?). He speaks of pre-industrial societies, namely tribal nomadic ones, or or pre-feudal village ones. But who's to say a bow or a wheel or fire aren't technology..? Perhaps I shouldn't be critiquing this as if it were is crowning work, The Anti-Tech Revolution... That had it's own issues, which I'll address on a future reread. For now though, this is a concentrated acid.

Why the hag gets top billing is ponderous, given her contribution consists of fore- and afterword. Ivan abridges his comings and going from various cities, villages, institution in a few USSR republics and oblasts, his dealings, misgivings, conversations, pleas, fights, meals, etc. with many people. He is, to a degree, a walking, talking example of a stereotype for Russians, but he hauls in the much needed absent context for the reasoning of the common folk of various groups at the time, bringing to life the Soviet and post-Soviet periods in these places. If you've experienced any of which, you'll get a good tragicomedy, otherwise the austereness may fly over your head, and the jokes you won't get (not that they're meant to be funny⸻the absurd attempts at poking fun is more human triumph than risible any play on words of these sad fucks can ever be, or very, very depressing, depending on your view on life and meaning). The brevity of the piece is disappointing, since it is quite an interesting read: if gulag and konzlager survivors could at write novel-length, this dude's life should've filled around 4 or 5 books of this one's length with observations and tales, albeit memory's a bitch when you're shitfaced most of the time, I'd wager. Great read.

Absolute shit. 35% in, void of the respect for that which it rails against has brought to industrial and post-industrial societies, or knowledge of the effects of what it pontificates for will about in these. benefit of the doubt would be horribly written by a child-minded, not would be intended malice.

Absolute shit. 35% in, void of the respect for that which it rails against has brought to industrial and post-industrial societies, or knowledge of the effects of what it pontificates for will about in these. benefit of the doubt would be horribly written by a child-minded, not would be intended malice.

Absolute shit. 35% in, void of the respect for that which it rails against has brought to industrial and post-industrial societies, or knowledge of the effects of what it pontificates for will about in these. benefit of the doubt would be horribly written by a child-minded, not would be intended malice.

Absolute shit. 35% in, void of the respect for that which it rails against has brought to industrial and post-industrial societies, or knowledge of the effects of what it pontificates for will about in these. benefit of the doubt would be horribly written by a child-minded, not would be intended malice.

Absolute shit. 35% in, void of the respect for that which it rails against has brought to industrial and post-industrial societies, or knowledge of the effects of what it pontificates for will about in these. benefit of the doubt would be horribly written by a child-minded, not would be intended malice.

Absolute shit. 35% in, void of the respect for that which it rails against has brought to industrial and post-industrial societies, or knowledge of the effects of what it pontificates for will about in these. benefit of the doubt would be horribly written by a child-minded, not would be intended malice.

To the fucking retard, slobbering over this work in /pol/, who would not⸻or if I were more cynical and or despondant⸻, could not engage what I put forth as questions and ideas for the shortest of time spans (the origin topic having but barely passingly in common with the book's)⸻, well, motherfucker, this book better fucking be good, because so far it's so fucking flat, so fucking bad. Fuck me, I hate stupid, naive, predictable, hollow 'people', if you can call these husks of flesh people. Rightoid, or leftoid⸻both historic terms that have little to no meaning, let alone consistent meaning across people, communities, countries⸻, if you rely on bad literature, badfaith argumentation, if you care not about higher ideals but would rather goodboi points from a higher authority of your choosing, your ingroup, or the like, then do humanity a favor and neck yourself, if you're so incorrigible as to listen to another viewpoint, to see reason, to act in goodfaith⸻, I'm tired. I'm too fucking tired. Writer isn't even all that prescient as it may seem to those lacking knowledge of politics and history over the past 200⸺250 years.

Yes, it does make make pertinent criticisms about 'the left', be it the brain-washed or the malicious power-hungry variants, and truths or good arguments don't lose strength when amidst bad, mid-schooler tier prose, but whatever the message or intent, it gets muddled and lost, and will fall on deaf ears. This is not the way to convince a neutral party, let alone the opposing one, this barely is a way. And as literature goes? Well, one'd have to suspend any advanced brain processing, forget facts and logic therewith to make this seem believable. Alternative timeline maybe..? Idunno..., I could've written this fecal smear of a propaganda fanfic within a day or two, that how unnoteworthy this is.

To the fucking retard, slobbering over this work in /pol/, who would not⸻or if I were more cynical and or despondant⸻, could not engage what I put forth as questions and ideas for the shortest of time spans (the origin topic having but barely passingly in common with the book's)⸻, well, motherfucker, this book better fucking be good, because so far it's so fucking flat, so fucking bad. Fuck me, I hate stupid, naive, predictable, hollow 'people', if you can call these husks of flesh people. Rightoid, or leftoid⸻both historic terms that have little to no meaning, let alone consistent meaning across people, communities, countries⸻, if you rely on bad literature, badfaith argumentation, if you care not about higher ideals but would rather goodboi points from a higher authority of your choosing, your ingroup, or the like, then do humanity a favor and neck yourself, if you're so incorrigible as to listen to another viewpoint, to see reason, to act in goodfaith⸻, I'm tired. I'm too fucking tired. Writer isn't even all that prescient as it may seem to those lacking knowledge of politics and history over the past 200⸺250 years.

Yes, it does make make pertinent criticisms about 'the left', be it the brain-washed or the malicious power-hungry variants, and truths or good arguments don't lose strength when amidst bad, mid-schooler tier prose, but whatever the message or intent, it gets muddled and lost, and will fall on deaf ears. This is not the way to convince a neutral party, let alone the opposing one, this barely is a way. And as literature goes? Well, one'd have to suspend any advanced brain processing, forget facts and logic therewith to make this seem believable. Alternative timeline maybe..? Idunno..., I could've written this fecal smear of a propaganda fanfic within a day or two, that how unnoteworthy this is.

To the fucking retard, slobbering over this work in /pol/, who would not⸻or if I were more cynical and or despondant⸻, could not engage what I put forth as questions and ideas for the shortest of time spans (the origin topic having but barely passingly in common with the book's)⸻, well, motherfucker, this book better fucking be good, because so far it's so fucking flat, so fucking bad. Fuck me, I hate stupid, naive, predictable, hollow 'people', if you can call these husks of flesh people. Rightoid, or leftoid⸻both historic terms that have little to no meaning, let alone consistent meaning across people, communities, countries⸻, if you rely on bad literature, badfaith argumentation, if you care not about higher ideals but would rather goodboi points from a higher authority of your choosing, your ingroup, or the like, then do humanity a favor and neck yourself, if you're so incorrigible as to listen to another viewpoint, to see reason, to act in goodfaith⸻, I'm tired. I'm too fucking tired. Writer isn't even all that prescient as it may seem to those lacking knowledge of politics and history over the past 200⸺250 years.

Yes, it does make make pertinent criticisms about 'the left', be it the brain-washed or the malicious power-hungry variants, and truths or good arguments don't lose strength when amidst bad, mid-schooler tier prose, but whatever the message or intent, it gets muddled and lost, and will fall on deaf ears. This is not the way to convince a neutral party, let alone the opposing one, this barely is a way. And as literature goes? Well, one'd have to suspend any advanced brain processing, forget facts and logic therewith to make this seem believable. Alternative timeline maybe..? Idunno..., I could've written this fecal smear of a propaganda fanfic within a day or two, that how unnoteworthy this is.

To the fucking retard, slobbering over this work in /pol/, who would not⸻or if I were more cynical and or despondant⸻, could not engage what I put forth as questions and ideas for the shortest of time spans (the origin topic having but barely passingly in common with the book's)⸻, well, motherfucker, this book better fucking be good, because so far it's so fucking flat, so fucking bad. Fuck me, I hate stupid, naive, predictable, hollow 'people', if you can call these husks of flesh people. Rightoid, or leftoid⸻both historic terms that have little to no meaning, let alone consistent meaning across people, communities, countries⸻, if you rely on bad literature, badfaith argumentation, if you care not about higher ideals but would rather goodboi points from a higher authority of your choosing, your ingroup, or the like, then do humanity a favor and neck yourself, if you're so incorrigible as to listen to another viewpoint, to see reason, to act in goodfaith⸻, I'm tired. I'm too fucking tired. Writer isn't even all that prescient as it may seem to those lacking knowledge of politics and history over the past 200⸺250 years.

Yes, it does make make pertinent criticisms about 'the left', be it the brain-washed or the malicious power-hungry variants, and truths or good arguments don't lose strength when amidst bad, mid-schooler tier prose, but whatever the message or intent, it gets muddled and lost, and will fall on deaf ears. This is not the way to convince a neutral party, let alone the opposing one, this barely is a way. And as literature goes? Well, one'd have to suspend any advanced brain processing, forget facts and logic therewith to make this seem believable. Alternative timeline maybe..? Idunno..., I could've written this fecal smear of a propaganda fanfic within a day or two, that how unnoteworthy this is.

Zaney⸻the (tryhard) novel, only that cartoons and even some movies have done it better, going off of memory. It didn't go in balls deep, lingering too much at times, killing pacing. As as string of skits around the same loose story would've done better. Neither exactly target child and teenagers, nor adult, I can see it failing at keeping either satisfied. The quirks and idiosyncrasies of the settings and characters are its distinguishing features and the lack of character development (in all but one) make this a rather lackluster one-trick pony.

Zaney⸻the (tryhard) novel, only that cartoons and even some movies have done it better, going off of memory. It didn't go in balls deep, lingering too much at times, killing pacing. As as string of skits around the same loose story would've done better. Neither exactly target child and teenagers, nor adult, I can see it failing at keeping either satisfied. The quirks and idiosyncrasies of the settings and characters are its distinguishing features and the lack of character development (in all but one) make this a rather lackluster one-trick pony.

Zaney⸻the (tryhard) novel, only that cartoons and even some movies have done it better, going off of memory. It didn't go in balls deep, lingering too much at times, killing pacing. As as string of skits around the same loose story would've done better. Neither exactly target child and teenagers, nor adult, I can see it failing at keeping either satisfied. The quirks and idiosyncrasies of the settings and characters are its distinguishing features and the lack of character development (in all but one) make this a rather lackluster one-trick pony.

Zaney⸻the (tryhard) novel, only that cartoons and even some movies have done it better, going off of memory. It didn't go in balls deep, lingering too much at times, killing pacing. As as string of skits around the same loose story would've done better. Neither exactly target child and teenagers, nor adult, I can see it failing at keeping either satisfied. The quirks and idiosyncrasies of the settings and characters are its distinguishing features and the lack of character development (in all but one) make this a rather lackluster one-trick pony.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

A hey-what-if kind of novel of things that nag at us (or me) in live, doing them, and not getting caught, and continuing exploration of what it is to be alive actually. Why do we do this and not that? Why should we try this? Why can't we be like this? What the fuck is up with people? I loved it, very, very human novel.

Documents the many trials and few tribulation around the discovery, manufacture, patenting, sale, etc. of insulin from the very start. Meticulous work, possibly too much so for the lay, but well put together.

Documents the many trials and few tribulation around the discovery, manufacture, patenting, sale, etc. of insulin from the very start. Meticulous work, possibly too much so for the lay, but well put together.

Documents the many trials and few tribulation around the discovery, manufacture, patenting, sale, etc. of insulin from the very start. Meticulous work, possibly too much so for the lay, but well put together.

Documents the many trials and few tribulation around the discovery, manufacture, patenting, sale, etc. of insulin from the very start. Meticulous work, possibly too much so for the lay, but well put together.

Documents the many trials and few tribulation around the discovery, manufacture, patenting, sale, etc. of insulin from the very start. Meticulous work, possibly too much so for the lay, but well put together.

Documents the many trials and few tribulation around the discovery, manufacture, patenting, sale, etc. of insulin from the very start. Meticulous work, possibly too much so for the lay, but well put together.

Documents the many trials and few tribulation around the discovery, manufacture, patenting, sale, etc. of insulin from the very start. Meticulous work, possibly too much so for the lay, but well put together.

Documents the many trials and few tribulation around the discovery, manufacture, patenting, sale, etc. of insulin from the very start. Meticulous work, possibly too much so for the lay, but well put together.

Icelandic author become prominent in the Nordic countries enough to risk translation into English several times over. I'd seen his name here and there and new of his existence. On a whim for a fun thriller, I went for The Island, thinking of the movie Shutter Island, with which it only shares insular locations, nevertheless it wasn't disappointing. Hours ago, I finish Snowblind by the selfsame author, and have begun the second in that series. Those share with this book the following: all characters receive backstory, motivation, and either development or refinement. It is rare to have an impartial spectator divvying of his time amongst all actors, major or minor, filling in blanks, adding nuiance, tints and shades, credibility or believability. That and the setting and atmosphere I most enjoyed about it. Additionally, even though I said there's no lead, the investigating officer, since this is almost a detective novel, but not really, is female and very female, very normal, and, I don't want to repeat myself, but, believable. No pacing issues, no over-the-top or superhuman bullshit. Nothing's been hidden from the reader to be noticed only by Holmes to then spew bullshit, everything written seems carefully deliberated, and is never in deficit or excess.

Icelandic author become prominent in the Nordic countries enough to risk translation into English several times over. I'd seen his name here and there and new of his existence. On a whim for a fun thriller, I went for The Island, thinking of the movie Shutter Island, with which it only shares insular locations, nevertheless it wasn't disappointing. Hours ago, I finish Snowblind by the selfsame author, and have begun the second in that series. Those share with this book the following: all characters receive backstory, motivation, and either development or refinement. It is rare to have an impartial spectator divvying of his time amongst all actors, major or minor, filling in blanks, adding nuiance, tints and shades, credibility or believability. That and the setting and atmosphere I most enjoyed about it. Additionally, even though I said there's no lead, the investigating officer, since this is almost a detective novel, but not really, is female and very female, very normal, and, I don't want to repeat myself, but, believable. No pacing issues, no over-the-top or superhuman bullshit. Nothing's been hidden from the reader to be noticed only by Holmes to then spew bullshit, everything written seems carefully deliberated, and is never in deficit or excess.

Icelandic author become prominent in the Nordic countries enough to risk translation into English several times over. I'd seen his name here and there and new of his existence. On a whim for a fun thriller, I went for The Island, thinking of the movie Shutter Island, with which it only shares insular locations, nevertheless it wasn't disappointing. Hours ago, I finish Snowblind by the selfsame author, and have begun the second in that series. Those share with this book the following: all characters receive backstory, motivation, and either development or refinement. It is rare to have an impartial spectator divvying of his time amongst all actors, major or minor, filling in blanks, adding nuiance, tints and shades, credibility or believability. That and the setting and atmosphere I most enjoyed about it. Additionally, even though I said there's no lead, the investigating officer, since this is almost a detective novel, but not really, is female and very female, very normal, and, I don't want to repeat myself, but, believable. No pacing issues, no over-the-top or superhuman bullshit. Nothing's been hidden from the reader to be noticed only by Holmes to then spew bullshit, everything written seems carefully deliberated, and is never in deficit or excess.

Icelandic author become prominent in the Nordic countries enough to risk translation into English several times over. I'd seen his name here and there and new of his existence. On a whim for a fun thriller, I went for The Island, thinking of the movie Shutter Island, with which it only shares insular locations, nevertheless it wasn't disappointing. Hours ago, I finish Snowblind by the selfsame author, and have begun the second in that series. Those share with this book the following: all characters receive backstory, motivation, and either development or refinement. It is rare to have an impartial spectator divvying of his time amongst all actors, major or minor, filling in blanks, adding nuiance, tints and shades, credibility or believability. That and the setting and atmosphere I most enjoyed about it. Additionally, even though I said there's no lead, the investigating officer, since this is almost a detective novel, but not really, is female and very female, very normal, and, I don't want to repeat myself, but, believable. No pacing issues, no over-the-top or superhuman bullshit. Nothing's been hidden from the reader to be noticed only by Holmes to then spew bullshit, everything written seems carefully deliberated, and is never in deficit or excess.

Icelandic author become prominent in the Nordic countries enough to risk translation into English several times over. I'd seen his name here and there and new of his existence. On a whim for a fun thriller, I went for The Island, thinking of the movie Shutter Island, with which it only shares insular locations, nevertheless it wasn't disappointing. Hours ago, I finish Snowblind by the selfsame author, and have begun the second in that series. Those share with this book the following: all characters receive backstory, motivation, and either development or refinement. It is rare to have an impartial spectator divvying of his time amongst all actors, major or minor, filling in blanks, adding nuiance, tints and shades, credibility or believability. That and the setting and atmosphere I most enjoyed about it. Additionally, even though I said there's no lead, the investigating officer, since this is almost a detective novel, but not really, is female and very female, very normal, and, I don't want to repeat myself, but, believable. No pacing issues, no over-the-top or superhuman bullshit. Nothing's been hidden from the reader to be noticed only by Holmes to then spew bullshit, everything written seems carefully deliberated, and is never in deficit or excess.

Icelandic author become prominent in the Nordic countries enough to risk translation into English several times over. I'd seen his name here and there and new of his existence. On a whim for a fun thriller, I went for The Island, thinking of the movie Shutter Island, with which it only shares insular locations, nevertheless it wasn't disappointing. Hours ago, I finish Snowblind by the selfsame author, and have begun the second in that series. Those share with this book the following: all characters receive backstory, motivation, and either development or refinement. It is rare to have an impartial spectator divvying of his time amongst all actors, major or minor, filling in blanks, adding nuiance, tints and shades, credibility or believability. That and the setting and atmosphere I most enjoyed about it. Additionally, even though I said there's no lead, the investigating officer, since this is almost a detective novel, but not really, is female and very female, very normal, and, I don't want to repeat myself, but, believable. No pacing issues, no over-the-top or superhuman bullshit. Nothing's been hidden from the reader to be noticed only by Holmes to then spew bullshit, everything written seems carefully deliberated, and is never in deficit or excess.

Icelandic author become prominent in the Nordic countries enough to risk translation into English several times over. I'd seen his name here and there and new of his existence. On a whim for a fun thriller, I went for The Island, thinking of the movie Shutter Island, with which it only shares insular locations, nevertheless it wasn't disappointing. Hours ago, I finish Snowblind by the selfsame author, and have begun the second in that series. Those share with this book the following: all characters receive backstory, motivation, and either development or refinement. It is rare to have an impartial spectator divvying of his time amongst all actors, major or minor, filling in blanks, adding nuiance, tints and shades, credibility or believability. That and the setting and atmosphere I most enjoyed about it. Additionally, even though I said there's no lead, the investigating officer, since this is almost a detective novel, but not really, is female and very female, very normal, and, I don't want to repeat myself, but, believable. No pacing issues, no over-the-top or superhuman bullshit. Nothing's been hidden from the reader to be noticed only by Holmes to then spew bullshit, everything written seems carefully deliberated, and is never in deficit or excess.

Icelandic author become prominent in the Nordic countries enough to risk translation into English several times over. I'd seen his name here and there and new of his existence. On a whim for a fun thriller, I went for The Island, thinking of the movie Shutter Island, with which it only shares insular locations, nevertheless it wasn't disappointing. Hours ago, I finish Snowblind by the selfsame author, and have begun the second in that series. Those share with this book the following: all characters receive backstory, motivation, and either development or refinement. It is rare to have an impartial spectator divvying of his time amongst all actors, major or minor, filling in blanks, adding nuiance, tints and shades, credibility or believability. That and the setting and atmosphere I most enjoyed about it. Additionally, even though I said there's no lead, the investigating officer, since this is almost a detective novel, but not really, is female and very female, very normal, and, I don't want to repeat myself, but, believable. No pacing issues, no over-the-top or superhuman bullshit. Nothing's been hidden from the reader to be noticed only by Holmes to then spew bullshit, everything written seems carefully deliberated, and is never in deficit or excess.

Icelandic author become prominent in the Nordic countries enough to risk translation into English several times over. I'd seen his name here and there and new of his existence. On a whim for a fun thriller, I went for The Island, thinking of the movie Shutter Island, with which it only shares insular locations, nevertheless it wasn't disappointing. Hours ago, I finish Snowblind by the selfsame author, and have begun the second in that series. Those share with this book the following: all characters receive backstory, motivation, and either development or refinement. It is rare to have an impartial spectator divvying of his time amongst all actors, major or minor, filling in blanks, adding nuiance, tints and shades, credibility or believability. That and the setting and atmosphere I most enjoyed about it. Additionally, even though I said there's no lead, the investigating officer, since this is almost a detective novel, but not really, is female and very female, very normal, and, I don't want to repeat myself, but, believable. No pacing issues, no over-the-top or superhuman bullshit. Nothing's been hidden from the reader to be noticed only by Holmes to then spew bullshit, everything written seems carefully deliberated, and is never in deficit or excess.

Icelandic author become prominent in the Nordic countries enough to risk translation into English several times over. I'd seen his name here and there and new of his existence. On a whim for a fun thriller, I went for The Island, thinking of the movie Shutter Island, with which it only shares insular locations, nevertheless it wasn't disappointing. Hours ago, I finish Snowblind by the selfsame author, and have begun the second in that series. Those share with this book the following: all characters receive backstory, motivation, and either development or refinement. It is rare to have an impartial spectator divvying of his time amongst all actors, major or minor, filling in blanks, adding nuiance, tints and shades, credibility or believability. That and the setting and atmosphere I most enjoyed about it. Additionally, even though I said there's no lead, the investigating officer, since this is almost a detective novel, but not really, is female and very female, very normal, and, I don't want to repeat myself, but, believable. No pacing issues, no over-the-top or superhuman bullshit. Nothing's been hidden from the reader to be noticed only by Holmes to then spew bullshit, everything written seems carefully deliberated, and is never in deficit or excess.

The book childishly, in that cookie-cutter Japanese way, tackles what books are worth, what one's time is worth, how books should be interacted with. I recall an article that was objectively wrong in some of its author's assumption or presumptions, and more moralistic and holier-than-thou than informative, argumentative, comparative from what I recall; since the topic is dear to me, it left a bad taste in my mouth, that of missing out on a challenge, on something new, more, better. This short book presents that article's arguments in a way, as well as fictitious examples. I appreciate the book, I do. If you'd cut out the relationship with the girl and the other classmate altogether, and made the main either a normal child (rather than a Japanese one⸻cookie-cutter self-insert with B&W worldview), or just a hooman bean, it'd've'n a been great. Although I disagree with a child another person literally shouting out you 'no, you dont live books, bc i dont do that!' I like the ideas and challenges as food for thought. Think snacks. Brain gum.

Ultimately, a combination of the first two labyrinths' masters' and the protag's reading styles, one'd get the best of all, since neither is endless repetition, with or without depth, inherently good, neither is ceaseless novelty chasing, neither is there sufficient time to read all books deliberately, carefully, taking notes, taking one's time. Commenting on the side of the publisher is hard, on authors' too. Some author have worked over one odd jobs for decades before 'making it', that is, making enough sustain theirselves and or families.

Annoying, unappreciative, stup–-, irrational woman main that gets to have her cake several times over. And she doesn't fucking choke to death on it in the end. What a disappoint. Old idea, so-so execution, acts 1 and 2 are meh. Not all women are boring and stupid and predictable children; write a good woman character for fucking woman, for fuck's sack. T_T

Could've'n a mix of The Catcher in the Rye and Dead Poet Society, but nah, let's be boring. 40% and nothing of note has happened, the main hasn't developed, regressed, progressed, changed.Unsatisfactory and offers nothing.

Earlier novel, one of of the 3⸺4 that are in a shared universe (dr sadist, mr snuff, and sth else), each exploring the a character, setting, background. Is okay, but somewhat bland and predictable compared to other of his works.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

More anecdotes (and hearsay, as if) dryly reported than documenting events or weaving a narrative, or anything interesting (to me). The reluctance of the characters to be identified, open etc. doesn't help with that. So be it. The movie The Exorcist, based on the eponymous novel, derives from this case. More here.

Damn son, this is some boring-ass, trash writing from Norway's supposedly most prominent writer, English-wise.

Main story kinda dragged out, suspense not often built up properly, releases also weak, making whole bland and easily forgettable. The few cards it had, were played suboptimally. But, this is one of his early novels, thank fuck.

20h audiobook, would be ~2e5, does meticulous background checks on literally everything, which starts to get annoying given this is supposed to be a narrative, no encyclopedia. At a point, I just stopped caring what happens, to whom, or for what reasons. Great, if you're into history, maybe, I guess..?

Meh, passable. Hard to believe this cunt is famous for this. Neither the gore is gore-y, nor the descriptions extensive, nor the intensity palpable. Take out the cenobites and it's a dump cheating wife story that takes place over a few paragraphs. The only saving grace is its brevity.

Great book. Critique tho: almost everything attempted to be interpolated from the events having occurred around 60s American (Ivy League) universities, which is not only oversimplifying, but missing key branches and looking at leaves only. The chapters on music/culture and abortion are also heavily moralized and one-sided, the former wrongly so, and would easily make one label Bork as 'an elitist old fart'.

What is says on the tin, no more, no less, no politics, no inanity. Exactly what an M or bold M should be.

Fuck me, this is some really bad writing. Specialitous + annoying woman protag. Insufferable.

Nice, perhaps too-short-to-be-really-enjoyable telling of Nic Cage's life and career, published around his fourth decade in the business. I'm a Cage fan and have been intrigued by this cool weirdo since childhood. The appended to the book catalog terse reviews plus ratings of each and every flick he's participated in is well appreciated. Stays on topic without jumping around, but does bad to stick too much to officials.

At first, I thought it was annoying, or all too perfect, but gradually, mister author washed over his built up sand castle to reveal a withered, sandblasted branch holding the thing together beautifully. The novel's jacket was discouraging, but the second and third acts made up for it. The novel tackles loneliness, addresses its consequences and its sufferers with propositions for undertakings. It reads as believable to a great degree, albeit a too optimistically, too luckily, that is, IRL, it'd be (much) worse. Nevertheless, this is the sort of book to bring people like myself to action, be it for myself, or others. Characters were well-formed, fully formed, that is, with clear motivations for their actions and thoughts, with histories, with un-clear-cut attitudes and relationships. Pondering what I'd want better and how, little stood out before remembering the flashbacks or the episodes taking place in the past. These were prominent in the first two acts, and color in the contours etched by the present's happenings, however, being in the past, they've not the same impact or import, and often felt as if they were diverting attention from the main course more often. Chaining ~85% of these right after the introductory chapter or two would have made for a more straightforwards experience, I would argue. Otherwise great novel.

Defo find the audiobook! Has grade A voicing. The content itself is an entertaining travel-log/diary with funnies based on lingual and cultural misundertstandings, and stereotypes about an Italian magazine writer's 1950s relocation and ultimately establishing in Australia.

I got through two and change stories of the total seventeen. Fuck me. The editor's forward lines you up for disappointment. Maybe his editing style, taste, and appraisal ability are very far from mine, stronger in different areas, I don't know⸻but this is some mightily boring shit. I cared not about the setting, the characters, the premises, anything. Exerting yourself to be bored. Verily do I doubt anything would be different had I seen the paintings inspiring these stories.

So, it's 201705XX and this shit gets published. ... Pardon me, but how exactly did this pass the cutting room, or is this the heavily edited version we're getting? The cabin-in-the-woods slasher has been done how many hundreds of thousands of times since the 1960s on the cinema screen or page? The cannibalistic family or 'family' story has been reiterated on film, television, and literature, cheap and well-known. In my last 1.5a of reading, I've come across 4⸺5 of the latter, and over 10 of the former. Not a single character, motive, settings, motivation, description, action herein has not been elsewhere done far better, and given when it was published, one would think the author would be familiar with the the genre, with the competition. Well, no⸻this reads like babee's first horror novel, and babee's equipped with the vocabulary arsenal, sentence construction complexity, and lack or failure at seriousness/depth of a late teenager, and the predictability and repetitiousness of a senile. Characters are static, no development over the few hours this takes place over, and what is reveals is exaggerated for the purposes of easier contrasting of the otherwise nondescript characters.

A play on the psychiatric hospital horror. Characters have some depth and enough distinction from one another to not blend into a nameless, faceless, normal in the statistical sense blob of fictional flesh. This one had some promise and didn't fail too-too badly. Prolongation of the novel again is a major flaw, suspense-release curve is mostly flat.

Takes way too long to progress, leaving me wanting for something, anything of note to happen. No clues are there to be discovered. Nothing funny to be observed. Nothing spooky, nothing perverse, nothing special. Stereotypes, mediocrely to badly portrayed. The loop at the end really just tells me this cunt think's he's clever. Writing is again amateurish. An editor or three is lacking.

Takes way too long to progress, leaving me wanting for something, anything of note to happen. No clues are there to be discovered. Nothing funny to be observed. Nothing spooky, nothing perverse, nothing special. Stereotypes, mediocrely to badly portrayed. The loop at the end really just tells me this cunt think's he's clever. Writing is again amateurish. An editor or three is lacking.

Takes way too long to progress, leaving me wanting for something, anything of note to happen. No clues are there to be discovered. Nothing funny to be observed. Nothing spooky, nothing perverse, nothing special. Stereotypes, mediocrely to badly portrayed. The loop at the end really just tells me this cunt think's he's clever. Writing is again amateurish. An editor or three is lacking.

Takes way too long to progress, leaving me wanting for something, anything of note to happen. No clues are there to be discovered. Nothing funny to be observed. Nothing spooky, nothing perverse, nothing special. Stereotypes, mediocrely to badly portrayed. The loop at the end really just tells me this cunt think's he's clever. Writing is again amateurish. An editor or three is lacking.

Hm. Promising, slightly entertaining first act, tailed by a noticeable change in both pace and tone, both for the worse, and ditto for the third. We have the nice premise of creatures having past lifetimes' experiences, or memories, but mostly knowledge being hunted for various reasons, among which by some weirdo 'extra-dimensional' race, that are, for all intents and purposes, magic and survival-type evil. Not overly consistent, but whatevs. Begrudgingly, the one character featuring depth and actual character got necked by an idiot 'savant'. Our protagonist and the necked bro see most of the development, sadly, and I say that because there was the opportunity ample for exploiting memes, subverting expectations, slapstick, stereotypes, etc., but, no. The neck bro is consistent, at least. Our main? A pallid facsimile attempting to hit some of the marks his clone in act one made, missing more often than not. Using jargon to the reader unfamiliar and never explained is also a no-no, rendering sentences into baby-talk at times. Same with the 'science' bits⸻it doesn't take itself too seriously, and it doesn't attempt hard scifi, at least. Supposedly there's a romance at the end..? These two exchanged, like, 2 paragraphs over the whole book, with no insinuations of anything being there. Second novel by this bloke, I'm hoping the first is better, and, if not, the third (nonextant).

Postscriptum. Reminiscent of

Hm. Promising, slightly entertaining first act, tailed by a noticeable change in both pace and tone, both for the worse, and ditto for the third. We have the nice premise of creatures having past lifetimes' experiences, or memories, but mostly knowledge being hunted for various reasons, among which by some weirdo 'extra-dimensional' race, that are, for all intents and purposes, magic and survival-type evil. Not overly consistent, but whatevs. Begrudgingly, the one character featuring depth and actual character got necked by an idiot 'savant'. Our protagonist and the necked bro see most of the development, sadly, and I say that because there was the opportunity ample for exploiting memes, subverting expectations, slapstick, stereotypes, etc., but, no. The neck bro is consistent, at least. Our main? A pallid facsimile attempting to hit some of the marks his clone in act one made, missing more often than not. Using jargon to the reader unfamiliar and never explained is also a no-no, rendering sentences into baby-talk at times. Same with the 'science' bits⸻it doesn't take itself too seriously, and it doesn't attempt hard scifi, at least. Supposedly there's a romance at the end..? These two exchanged, like, 2 paragraphs over the whole book, with no insinuations of anything being there. Second novel by this bloke, I'm hoping the first is better, and, if not, the third (nonextant).

Postscriptum. Reminiscent of

[Citation needed.]⸻the book. Bitter; making okay-ish at times points but for/from bad reason-s/ing, providing little-to-no evidence and citation; hearsay; strawmaning; both often on point and off his rocker, missing the point; too often seeming to be adorned by rolls of aluminum foil as cranial coverage. Bloke has much to say, but I am not his targeted audience. He hasn't a way with words, is far-flung from the scientific method or rationality or objectivity, nor can he entertain ideas. Features wholly one-dimensional mental space. Overall, nothing was learned. The bold M is for its, to me, light entertainment value as an endless, unreferenced tirade from a would-be besodden uncle on Thanksgiving with his trifle of truths, truck-load of truisms. Low-key slides in (rather easily outright refutable) amuse-bouches at strategic places. The tone and wording are 89% wrong, defo not reaching anybody not already familiar with or convinced of the the points brought up within.

[Citation needed.]⸻the book. Bitter; making okay-ish at times points but for/from bad reason-s/ing, providing little-to-no evidence and citation; hearsay; strawmaning; both often on point and off his rocker, missing the point; too often seeming to be adorned by rolls of aluminum foil as cranial coverage. Bloke has much to say, but I am not his targeted audience. He hasn't a way with words, is far-flung from the scientific method or rationality or objectivity, nor can he entertain ideas. Features wholly one-dimensional mental space. Overall, nothing was learned. The bold M is for its, to me, light entertainment value as an endless, unreferenced tirade from a would-be besodden uncle on Thanksgiving with his trifle of truths, truck-load of truisms. Low-key slides in (rather easily outright refutable) amuse-bouches at strategic places. The tone and wording are 89% wrong, defo not reaching anybody not already familiar with or convinced of the the points brought up within.

[Citation needed.]⸻the book. Bitter; making okay-ish at times points but for/from bad reason-s/ing, providing little-to-no evidence and citation; hearsay; strawmaning; both often on point and off his rocker, missing the point; too often seeming to be adorned by rolls of aluminum foil as cranial coverage. Bloke has much to say, but I am not his targeted audience. He hasn't a way with words, is far-flung from the scientific method or rationality or objectivity, nor can he entertain ideas. Features wholly one-dimensional mental space. Overall, nothing was learned. The bold M is for its, to me, light entertainment value as an endless, unreferenced tirade from a would-be besodden uncle on Thanksgiving with his trifle of truths, truck-load of truisms. Low-key slides in (rather easily outright refutable) amuse-bouches at strategic places. The tone and wording are 89% wrong, defo not reaching anybody not already familiar with or convinced of the the points brought up within.

[Citation needed.]⸻the book. Bitter; making okay-ish at times points but for/from bad reason-s/ing, providing little-to-no evidence and citation; hearsay; strawmaning; both often on point and off his rocker, missing the point; too often seeming to be adorned by rolls of aluminum foil as cranial coverage. Bloke has much to say, but I am not his targeted audience. He hasn't a way with words, is far-flung from the scientific method or rationality or objectivity, nor can he entertain ideas. Features wholly one-dimensional mental space. Overall, nothing was learned. The bold M is for its, to me, light entertainment value as an endless, unreferenced tirade from a would-be besodden uncle on Thanksgiving with his trifle of truths, truck-load of truisms. Low-key slides in (rather easily outright refutable) amuse-bouches at strategic places. The tone and wording are 89% wrong, defo not reaching anybody not already familiar with or convinced of the the points brought up within.

Old time pulp fiction series member, yet still just boring and meh. Gave it a wide berth, yet failed to make the tiniest of impacts.

Mediocre and bland, at the end predictable and just bad.

Annoying, woman writing. Slightly cringe too.

Annoying, obviously woman, bad writing. Wouldn't recognize depression, if it skullfucked her.

Annoying, obviously woman, bad writing. Wouldn't recognize depression, if it skullfucked her.

Annoying, obviously woman, bad writing. Wouldn't recognize depression, if it skullfucked her.

Fuck me. Compared to the movie, which, let's be honest, gave a humorous take on the source, which is incidentally this book, it's just a shitton of hearsay alongside what was dug up during the mid-00s on the subject. It's dry, too dry, but it also has zero science or explanation. I don't know if this is how military reports are or war journalism is, but only getting to resolution of the journo's questions kept me reading on. Good material, suboptimally conveyed. It can read like a boring (to me) novel, or a investigative report by some one dude.

Hm, for once, a decent-to-good novel featuring three females as the main protagonists. It certainly reads as something written during SARS-CoV2 times, or from somebody aware of China-style Marxist takeovers of society. A 60-yo and a 40⸺50-yo are the the bigguns, and a 14-yo smallun. To be honest, our main character, through whom most of the story is told, is predictable and annoying. The the naive, daft cunt of a human. Stereotypically bestial mother, kind of a Karen too, although harmless, meek, and weak. She does one thing well, namely being good with blood, possibly a medical nurse before the first bomb.

Weak point is the false dichotomization at times, and certainly the nigh cartoonish vilification and or characterization of the antagonists. Yes, pile on the hyperbole, the tropes, the stereotypes. Nuance would've not palliated the implied discussion on the subjects of mass subjugation, government propaganda, freedom, the impacts of centralized power and economy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Autobiographical account of Ed's story. Good, it explains governmental inadequacies, shadow government type conspiracies your uncle may spout at every occasion; but, it doesn't go too deep in, it omits some, it is a whitehat whistleblower in action. I greatly appreciated him going through the steps taken to ensure inculpability, security, anonymization among others, and privacy.

Bentley Little is a strange one. Two novels in⸻and the motherfucker has 32 The X up for grabs⸻, and both are exceeding long for what takes place, have random details thrown in, leading ultimately to nowhere, and has forced filling, or volume for the sake of volume, as if. It's mediocre to decent-ish, but they would've worked far better as a third of their originals lengths (usually around 110k words). The premises so far are chewed up old ideas, sprinkled with whatever's laying around. And the intensity is dialed back, with the snail speed of plot forwarding.

Bentley Little is a strange one. Two novels in⸻and the motherfucker has 32 The X up for grabs⸻, and both are exceeding long for what takes place, have random details thrown in, leading ultimately to nowhere, and has forced filling, or volume for the sake of volume, as if. It's mediocre to decent-ish, but they would've worked far better as a third of their originals lengths (usually around 110k words). The premises so far are chewed up old ideas, sprinkled with whatever's laying around. And the intensity is dialed back, with the snail speed of plot forwarding.

Bentley Little is a strange one. Two novels in⸻and the motherfucker has 32 The X up for grabs⸻, and both are exceeding long for what takes place, have random details thrown in, leading ultimately to nowhere, and has forced filling, or volume for the sake of volume, as if. It's mediocre to decent-ish, but they would've worked far better as a third of their originals lengths (usually around 110k words). The premises so far are chewed up old ideas, sprinkled with whatever's laying around. And the intensity is dialed back, with the snail speed of plot forwarding.

Bentley Little is a strange one. Two novels in⸻and the motherfucker has 32 The X up for grabs⸻, and both are exceeding long for what takes place, have random details thrown in, leading ultimately to nowhere, and has forced filling, or volume for the sake of volume, as if. It's mediocre to decent-ish, but they would've worked far better as a third of their originals lengths (usually around 110k words). The premises so far are chewed up old ideas, sprinkled with whatever's laying around. And the intensity is dialed back, with the snail speed of plot forwarding.

Bentley Little is a strange one. Two novels in⸻and the motherfucker has 32 The X up for grabs⸻, and both are exceeding long for what takes place, have random details thrown in, leading ultimately to nowhere, and has forced filling, or volume for the sake of volume, as if. It's mediocre to decent-ish, but they would've worked far better as a third of their originals lengths (usually around 110k words). The premises so far are chewed up old ideas, sprinkled with whatever's laying around. And the intensity is dialed back, with the snail speed of plot forwarding.

Way to show you bias, Matt, fisting them in at every obvious hole. Sheesh. Which is to say, the impact of the book is somewhat lessened, the reader put off, if not of the same persuasion and of lower standards of reasoning, which the author transgresses against every time the issue strikes a nerve, which, I'd say, is all too often. What you're talking about isn't bad because you espouse a mainstream religion (e.g., Catholicism, Protestantism, etc.), or whatever-the-fuck, it's bad because it doesn't work, hasn't worked, can't work, because it is internally inconsistent, doesn't hold any predictive power, is vastly more wrong/bad than right/good in its statements, predictions, actions. That small critique aside, I would say this is book portrays a man's attempt at grappling with a currently difficult to answer question by anybody on the Marxist left, anybody politically correct, or etc., and getting sidetracked into gender studies and its effects on children, adolescents, adults; the economy, public policy, and big pharma among others. While Matt doesn't give it a shake as fair as James A. Lindsay, he does try. The book is comprised of his thought process and various interviews with both victims and perpetrators; some history is covered in 2⸺3 individuals, but he got bogged down by the obtuseness of the language (mis-)used in their articles, is my presumption.

A hodgepodge of collected (life-)hacks, as if, from a multitude of enthused, young, whippersnapper activists, hippies, nothing-writers from online-only magazine. Over 80% of the book is common sense- or knowledge-based arguments about cost reduction (how to deal with rain while running, clothing to buy, dealing with old stuff, shit to preferably buy), things that, in the end, I'd argue, won't save you even a quarter of the money required for 2⸺3 decades of official joblessness. The chief thing, for me, is to, for every product one buys, every activity one consciously engages in, every decision one takes, weigh the pluses and minuses in the context of your goal (which in the case of the book is either saving/not spending more money than you make, or vice versa). Decent–good one-time read for a frugal, or creative, or willing-to-spend-the-time person.

A hodgepodge of collected (life-)hacks, as if, from a multitude of enthused, young, whippersnapper activists, hippies, nothing-writers from online-only magazine. Over 80% of the book is common sense- or knowledge-based arguments about cost reduction (how to deal with rain while running, clothing to buy, dealing with old stuff, shit to preferably buy), things that, in the end, I'd argue, won't save you even a quarter of the money required for 2⸺3 decades of official joblessness. The chief thing, for me, is to, for every product one buys, every activity one consciously engages in, every decision one takes, weigh the pluses and minuses in the context of your goal (which in the case of the book is either saving/not spending more money than you make, or vice versa). Decent–good one-time read for a frugal, or creative, or willing-to-spend-the-time person.

A hodgepodge of collected (life-)hacks, as if, from a multitude of enthused, young, whippersnapper activists, hippies, nothing-writers from online-only magazine. Over 80% of the book is common sense- or knowledge-based arguments about cost reduction (how to deal with rain while running, clothing to buy, dealing with old stuff, shit to preferably buy), things that, in the end, I'd argue, won't save you even a quarter of the money required for 2⸺3 decades of official joblessness. The chief thing, for me, is to, for every product one buys, every activity one consciously engages in, every decision one takes, weigh the pluses and minuses in the context of your goal (which in the case of the book is either saving/not spending more money than you make, or vice versa). Decent–good one-time read for a frugal, or creative, or willing-to-spend-the-time person.

A hodgepodge of collected (life-)hacks, as if, from a multitude of enthused, young, whippersnapper activists, hippies, nothing-writers from online-only magazine. Over 80% of the book is common sense- or knowledge-based arguments about cost reduction (how to deal with rain while running, clothing to buy, dealing with old stuff, shit to preferably buy), things that, in the end, I'd argue, won't save you even a quarter of the money required for 2⸺3 decades of official joblessness. The chief thing, for me, is to, for every product one buys, every activity one consciously engages in, every decision one takes, weigh the pluses and minuses in the context of your goal (which in the case of the book is either saving/not spending more money than you make, or vice versa). Decent–good one-time read for a frugal, or creative, or willing-to-spend-the-time person.

A hodgepodge of collected (life-)hacks, as if, from a multitude of enthused, young, whippersnapper activists, hippies, nothing-writers from online-only magazine. Over 80% of the book is common sense- or knowledge-based arguments about cost reduction (how to deal with rain while running, clothing to buy, dealing with old stuff, shit to preferably buy), things that, in the end, I'd argue, won't save you even a quarter of the money required for 2⸺3 decades of official joblessness. The chief thing, for me, is to, for every product one buys, every activity one consciously engages in, every decision one takes, weigh the pluses and minuses in the context of your goal (which in the case of the book is either saving/not spending more money than you make, or vice versa). Decent–good one-time read for a frugal, or creative, or willing-to-spend-the-time person.

A hodgepodge of collected (life-)hacks, as if, from a multitude of enthused, young, whippersnapper activists, hippies, nothing-writers from online-only magazine. Over 80% of the book is common sense- or knowledge-based arguments about cost reduction (how to deal with rain while running, clothing to buy, dealing with old stuff, shit to preferably buy), things that, in the end, I'd argue, won't save you even a quarter of the money required for 2⸺3 decades of official joblessness. The chief thing, for me, is to, for every product one buys, every activity one consciously engages in, every decision one takes, weigh the pluses and minuses in the context of your goal (which in the case of the book is either saving/not spending more money than you make, or vice versa). Decent–good one-time read for a frugal, or creative, or willing-to-spend-the-time person.

A hodgepodge of collected (life-)hacks, as if, from a multitude of enthused, young, whippersnapper activists, hippies, nothing-writers from online-only magazine. Over 80% of the book is common sense- or knowledge-based arguments about cost reduction (how to deal with rain while running, clothing to buy, dealing with old stuff, shit to preferably buy), things that, in the end, I'd argue, won't save you even a quarter of the money required for 2⸺3 decades of official joblessness. The chief thing, for me, is to, for every product one buys, every activity one consciously engages in, every decision one takes, weigh the pluses and minuses in the context of your goal (which in the case of the book is either saving/not spending more money than you make, or vice versa). Decent–good one-time read for a frugal, or creative, or willing-to-spend-the-time person.

A hodgepodge of collected (life-)hacks, as if, from a multitude of enthused, young, whippersnapper activists, hippies, nothing-writers from online-only magazine. Over 80% of the book is common sense- or knowledge-based arguments about cost reduction (how to deal with rain while running, clothing to buy, dealing with old stuff, shit to preferably buy), things that, in the end, I'd argue, won't save you even a quarter of the money required for 2⸺3 decades of official joblessness. The chief thing, for me, is to, for every product one buys, every activity one consciously engages in, every decision one takes, weigh the pluses and minuses in the context of your goal (which in the case of the book is either saving/not spending more money than you make, or vice versa). Decent–good one-time read for a frugal, or creative, or willing-to-spend-the-time person.

A hodgepodge of collected (life-)hacks, as if, from a multitude of enthused, young, whippersnapper activists, hippies, nothing-writers from online-only magazine. Over 80% of the book is common sense- or knowledge-based arguments about cost reduction (how to deal with rain while running, clothing to buy, dealing with old stuff, shit to preferably buy), things that, in the end, I'd argue, won't save you even a quarter of the money required for 2⸺3 decades of official joblessness. The chief thing, for me, is to, for every product one buys, every activity one consciously engages in, every decision one takes, weigh the pluses and minuses in the context of your goal (which in the case of the book is either saving/not spending more money than you make, or vice versa). Decent–good one-time read for a frugal, or creative, or willing-to-spend-the-time person.

A hodgepodge of collected (life-)hacks, as if, from a multitude of enthused, young, whippersnapper activists, hippies, nothing-writers from online-only magazine. Over 80% of the book is common sense- or knowledge-based arguments about cost reduction (how to deal with rain while running, clothing to buy, dealing with old stuff, shit to preferably buy), things that, in the end, I'd argue, won't save you even a quarter of the money required for 2⸺3 decades of official joblessness. The chief thing, for me, is to, for every product one buys, every activity one consciously engages in, every decision one takes, weigh the pluses and minuses in the context of your goal (which in the case of the book is either saving/not spending more money than you make, or vice versa). Decent–good one-time read for a frugal, or creative, or willing-to-spend-the-time person.

Very entertaining for me autobiographical recount of a German musician-turned-writer/humorist born 1962. Maybe it just appeals to my sensibilities, likings, maybe it really is funny. Not documentary, nor dry, handles more with episodic stories, i.e., names, places, characters needn't to be kept track of. I had fun, and would reread it too.

Favorite of many TV chef and household name, I finally learn why so many like this bastard: the 60s' sex, drugs, and rock n' roll attitude, that of rebelling against decency, normalcy, or established anything, or its own sake, of beating and poisoning your body, and, ultimately, of being superficial (by which I mean, it was reactionary in being defined through what it opposes, out of which an aesthetic was born, which stuck unlike the attitude towards the' other', which didn't⸻because the latter changed (not gonna say 'evolved', lol)), that is, until he realized he may want to live a little longer and more stably, as he states around the end. He traverses his own history, pressing pause to tell stories, embellish, really, the minutae of the world. Somewhat of a snapshot of 70s, 80s, and 90s (coastal or big-city) America, its culture; and it's your kooky uncle Tony doing the exposé. Entertaining even if you don't like the guy, comme moi, but, to some degree, tolerate/excuse the actions/thoughts. I wish it were more vulgar, and longer, and had more stories, but no uncle is forever.

An interesting take on the origin and perpetual propagation of totalitarianism, or the centralization and misuse of power preordained in all derivatives of Marxism. Author is a psychologist by profession, hence the title, and although theory isn't as expansive and explanative as Mises' in The Omnipotent Government, it is nonetheless another valid one. An important distinction between them, for one, is that here it arises bottom-up as consequence of hoi poloi's mental state. He talks through 20. century history and attempts to apply his theory to the common cases of Italy, Germany, Russia, and China. This theory is not inimical to Mises' (or others) necessarily, but can help bridge the gap created by burdening one side (the left one, lol) with malice, disillusionment, disdain, greed, etc., whilst the other stays neutral. Rather, the people are split in three: neutral, docile/malleable, and skeptic/rebelling/opposing, (percentages, iirk, given for all historical examples), and their interactions make or break the emerging system. In presenting the motivations of the people, others may be move convinced to accept Mises' about the governing body.

An interesting take on the origin and perpetual propagation of totalitarianism, or the centralization and misuse of power preordained in all derivatives of Marxism. Author is a psychologist by profession, hence the title, and although theory isn't as expansive and explanative as Mises' in The Omnipotent Government, it is nonetheless another valid one. An important distinction between them, for one, is that here it arises bottom-up as consequence of hoi poloi's mental state. He talks through 20. century history and attempts to apply his theory to the common cases of Italy, Germany, Russia, and China. This theory is not inimical to Mises' (or others) necessarily, but can help bridge the gap created by burdening one side (the left one, lol) with malice, disillusionment, disdain, greed, etc., whilst the other stays neutral. Rather, the people are split in three: neutral, docile/malleable, and skeptic/rebelling/opposing, (percentages, iirk, given for all historical examples), and their interactions make or break the emerging system. In presenting the motivations of the people, others may be move convinced to accept Mises' about the governing body.

An interesting take on the origin and perpetual propagation of totalitarianism, or the centralization and misuse of power preordained in all derivatives of Marxism. Author is a psychologist by profession, hence the title, and although theory isn't as expansive and explanative as Mises' in The Omnipotent Government, it is nonetheless another valid one. An important distinction between them, for one, is that here it arises bottom-up as consequence of hoi poloi's mental state. He talks through 20. century history and attempts to apply his theory to the common cases of Italy, Germany, Russia, and China. This theory is not inimical to Mises' (or others) necessarily, but can help bridge the gap created by burdening one side (the left one, lol) with malice, disillusionment, disdain, greed, etc., whilst the other stays neutral. Rather, the people are split in three: neutral, docile/malleable, and skeptic/rebelling/opposing, (percentages, iirk, given for all historical examples), and their interactions make or break the emerging system. In presenting the motivations of the people, others may be move convinced to accept Mises' about the governing body.