Search
I'm Thinking of Ending Things
6.0
Rate It
Book
Soon to be a Netflix film directed by Charlie Kaufman. Jake and his girlfriend are on a drive to...
The Psychology of Screenwriting: Theory and Practice
Book
The Psychology of Screenwriting is more than an interesting book on the theory and practice of...
TR
The Routledge Handbook of International Beat Literature
Book
There was a time when "the Beats" seemed a familiar, even fixed, pantheon: Kerouac, Ginsberg,...
This Was a Man
Book
This Was a Man is the captivating final instalment of the Clifton Chronicles, a series of seven...
The Payoff: Why Wall Street Always Wins
Book
Lobbyist, White House Lawyer, and Senate Aide on the Power of America's Plutocracy to Avoid...
Hadley (567 KP) rated Handbook of Paranormal Powers in Books
Jun 2, 2019
I have always believed in the paranormal, but I am careful not to take everything at face value. When I picked up this book, I unfortunately took it at its face value, thinking that it was about how people developed these paranormal abilities and the things that they achieved with them.
But this book seems to have been written by a skeptic that disguised it as a book from a believer in the paranormal, which to say is a pretty clever way to sell a book when the belief in the paranormal is at an all time high. The author spends much of the book detailing people who have exhibited paranormal abilities just to quickly tear them down. I will say that Brian Haughton did a wonderful job on researching for this book, bringing up not only the history of paranormal abilities, but also self proclaimed psychics that readers may not have even heard of, such as Florence Cook, who had her abilities tested by none other than William Crookes( the discoverer of the element thallium).
Haughton's 'Handbook of Paranormal Powers' should have been titled something else, mostly because it's a history lesson in ESP and also, obviously, from the point-of-view of a skeptic. Yet, it doesn't lack for reading by believers; one such part I found interesting was a part on dowsing- the supernatural ability to find hidden objects, substances, geographic features, or sometimes even people- which you may have seen someone doing by holding two rods to find underground water. This part was about when dowsing became popular in the seventeenth-century France, and was being considered 'evil': ". . .with the dowser Baroness de Beausoleil and her husband, a mining expert, journeying across Europe and allegedly locating ore deposits of iron, gold, and silver. The couple established a thriving mineral company, but when their methods of locating metal ores became known they were accused of practicing the 'black arts' and imprisoned for the rest of their lives. " Readers learn that it wasn't until the nineteenth century, with the rise of spiritualism, that dowsing was no longer considered 'evil.'
Another one that interested me concerned the comedian Andy Kaufman, and his pursuit to rid himself of a rare lung cancer with psychic healing: "In March 1984, US comedian Andy Kaufman traveled to the Philippines for a six- week course of psychic surgery after being diagnosed with a rare lung cancer. The surgeon, Jun Labo, performed the operation, and claimed that he had removed large cancerous tumors from Kaufman's body. On May 16, 1984, Kaufman died from renal failure as a consequence of a metastatic lung cancer. "
I hate, but also love this book, not because Haughton backs up all of the skeptic claims with scientific research and tests, but because he claimed this to be a handbook or paranormal powers. If you glance at the cover, just below the title is: 'discover the secrets of mind readers, mediums, and more' - this can be taken that it's written by someone who believes in the paranormal, as well as someone who may have had personal experiences with the unknown, but with that said, I did learn a lot about the history of paranormal powers as well as people I had never heard of.
To prove the skepticism in Haughton's writing, we can turn to page 173, where he writes about how to test whether or not a self-proclaimed psychic surgeon is real. But even before this page and throughout this book, Haughton explains someone doing an extraordinary thing only to quickly explain away why it was fake to begin with. The 'Handbook of Paranormal Powers' reads a lot like a college thesis, that I found myself getting bored with the matter-of-fact tone. Some readers may enjoy reading essay-type books, but for me, it becomes repetitive enough that I don't remember much of the information I had just read.
Also, readers may come away with the feeling that Haughton doesn't care about the slight chance that some paranormal powers may be real, but instead he'd rather read about the scientific facts. I would only recommend this book to people who want to do a light reading on paranormal history, meaning mostly what made headlines in the news. For believers, I would suggest you go elsewhere.
But this book seems to have been written by a skeptic that disguised it as a book from a believer in the paranormal, which to say is a pretty clever way to sell a book when the belief in the paranormal is at an all time high. The author spends much of the book detailing people who have exhibited paranormal abilities just to quickly tear them down. I will say that Brian Haughton did a wonderful job on researching for this book, bringing up not only the history of paranormal abilities, but also self proclaimed psychics that readers may not have even heard of, such as Florence Cook, who had her abilities tested by none other than William Crookes( the discoverer of the element thallium).
Haughton's 'Handbook of Paranormal Powers' should have been titled something else, mostly because it's a history lesson in ESP and also, obviously, from the point-of-view of a skeptic. Yet, it doesn't lack for reading by believers; one such part I found interesting was a part on dowsing- the supernatural ability to find hidden objects, substances, geographic features, or sometimes even people- which you may have seen someone doing by holding two rods to find underground water. This part was about when dowsing became popular in the seventeenth-century France, and was being considered 'evil': ". . .with the dowser Baroness de Beausoleil and her husband, a mining expert, journeying across Europe and allegedly locating ore deposits of iron, gold, and silver. The couple established a thriving mineral company, but when their methods of locating metal ores became known they were accused of practicing the 'black arts' and imprisoned for the rest of their lives. " Readers learn that it wasn't until the nineteenth century, with the rise of spiritualism, that dowsing was no longer considered 'evil.'
Another one that interested me concerned the comedian Andy Kaufman, and his pursuit to rid himself of a rare lung cancer with psychic healing: "In March 1984, US comedian Andy Kaufman traveled to the Philippines for a six- week course of psychic surgery after being diagnosed with a rare lung cancer. The surgeon, Jun Labo, performed the operation, and claimed that he had removed large cancerous tumors from Kaufman's body. On May 16, 1984, Kaufman died from renal failure as a consequence of a metastatic lung cancer. "
I hate, but also love this book, not because Haughton backs up all of the skeptic claims with scientific research and tests, but because he claimed this to be a handbook or paranormal powers. If you glance at the cover, just below the title is: 'discover the secrets of mind readers, mediums, and more' - this can be taken that it's written by someone who believes in the paranormal, as well as someone who may have had personal experiences with the unknown, but with that said, I did learn a lot about the history of paranormal powers as well as people I had never heard of.
To prove the skepticism in Haughton's writing, we can turn to page 173, where he writes about how to test whether or not a self-proclaimed psychic surgeon is real. But even before this page and throughout this book, Haughton explains someone doing an extraordinary thing only to quickly explain away why it was fake to begin with. The 'Handbook of Paranormal Powers' reads a lot like a college thesis, that I found myself getting bored with the matter-of-fact tone. Some readers may enjoy reading essay-type books, but for me, it becomes repetitive enough that I don't remember much of the information I had just read.
Also, readers may come away with the feeling that Haughton doesn't care about the slight chance that some paranormal powers may be real, but instead he'd rather read about the scientific facts. I would only recommend this book to people who want to do a light reading on paranormal history, meaning mostly what made headlines in the news. For believers, I would suggest you go elsewhere.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated These Broken Stars (Starbound, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Original Review posted on <a title="These Broken Stars by Amie Kaufman and Megan Spooner" href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2013/12/arc-review-these-broken-stars-by-amie-kaufman.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Original Rating: 4.5 out of 5 owls
Note: Formatting may be lost due to copy and paste.
<i><b>Disclaimer:</b> Review copy provided by Disney Hyperion via Netgalley for review (thanks!)</i>
These Broken Stars follows two very different people, Lilac and Tarver, from a futuristic galaxy as they try to survive in the wilderness of an unknown planet after a ship crash in space.
I really love the way how These Broken Stars is set up and formatted. I didn't exactly understand it at first, but the beginning of each chapter is in the present (in terms of the book's timeline – not 2013), giving a very brief synopsis in a sort-of interview/interrogation style with Tarver. Then the chapter gives an elaboration, telling the story behind the interview/interrogation in Lilac's and Tarver's point of views. It sort of reminds me of If I Stay with its many flashbacks, but not as depressing (thankfully).
The romance between Lilac and Tarver is probably a little fast, but I can't really tell. In other words, compared to a lot of books I've come across that have romance, These Broken Stars is one of the ones not written in such a way that the reader may cringe. *phew*
What I didn't like though, is Tarver's personality. Usually I love it when a main character is sassy and has an attitude. Tarver's though... it just didn't bounce out really well. I mean, yes, he's sarcastic, and yes he has an attitude, but I just didn't really like it. It didn't really seem to go in with Lilac's personality.
I'm not being sexist. Otherwise, I would never have said that I liked Augustus Waters' personality from The Fault in Our Stars. In fact, I probably would have said that I hated Gus's personality.
(Oh no. With that being said, I'm bound to be the target of tomatoes for a while. *gives a very innocent look and ducks*)
It's not because it's John Green either. I can't always say an author is my favorite when it's my first time reading their work(s).
Of course, everyone's opinions, likes and dislikes of a character's attitude in a book is completely different from someone else.
For a debut novel, Kaufman writes an astronomically intriguing story. The situations Lilac and Tarver are put in aren't too exaggerated or unrealistic, and in a way, the story keeps the reader guessing until the author smoothly reveals what's really going on. I had to wonder a few times why a few horror elements were doing there, lurking about.
For anyone who likes science fiction/fantasy with a hint of romance, you might want to try out These Broken Stars. Maybe someone else will have a much better time with Tarver's personality. No guarantees, though. And no rollbacks in the process.
Original Rating: 4.5 out of 5 owls
Note: Formatting may be lost due to copy and paste.
<i><b>Disclaimer:</b> Review copy provided by Disney Hyperion via Netgalley for review (thanks!)</i>
These Broken Stars follows two very different people, Lilac and Tarver, from a futuristic galaxy as they try to survive in the wilderness of an unknown planet after a ship crash in space.
I really love the way how These Broken Stars is set up and formatted. I didn't exactly understand it at first, but the beginning of each chapter is in the present (in terms of the book's timeline – not 2013), giving a very brief synopsis in a sort-of interview/interrogation style with Tarver. Then the chapter gives an elaboration, telling the story behind the interview/interrogation in Lilac's and Tarver's point of views. It sort of reminds me of If I Stay with its many flashbacks, but not as depressing (thankfully).
The romance between Lilac and Tarver is probably a little fast, but I can't really tell. In other words, compared to a lot of books I've come across that have romance, These Broken Stars is one of the ones not written in such a way that the reader may cringe. *phew*
What I didn't like though, is Tarver's personality. Usually I love it when a main character is sassy and has an attitude. Tarver's though... it just didn't bounce out really well. I mean, yes, he's sarcastic, and yes he has an attitude, but I just didn't really like it. It didn't really seem to go in with Lilac's personality.
I'm not being sexist. Otherwise, I would never have said that I liked Augustus Waters' personality from The Fault in Our Stars. In fact, I probably would have said that I hated Gus's personality.
(Oh no. With that being said, I'm bound to be the target of tomatoes for a while. *gives a very innocent look and ducks*)
It's not because it's John Green either. I can't always say an author is my favorite when it's my first time reading their work(s).
Of course, everyone's opinions, likes and dislikes of a character's attitude in a book is completely different from someone else.
For a debut novel, Kaufman writes an astronomically intriguing story. The situations Lilac and Tarver are put in aren't too exaggerated or unrealistic, and in a way, the story keeps the reader guessing until the author smoothly reveals what's really going on. I had to wonder a few times why a few horror elements were doing there, lurking about.
For anyone who likes science fiction/fantasy with a hint of romance, you might want to try out These Broken Stars. Maybe someone else will have a much better time with Tarver's personality. No guarantees, though. And no rollbacks in the process.
The Clayton M. Christensen Reader
Harvard Business Review and Clayton M. Christensen
Book
The best of Clayton Christensen's seminal work on disruptive innovation, all in one place. No...
LL
Leading Ladies
Book
Comedy / 5m, 3f / Unit set. In this hilarious comedy by the author of Lend Me A Tenor and Moon Over...
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Jim & Andy: The Great Beyond (2017) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
Documentaries, they can’t be trusted, can they? There is always a purpose and a message the film-maker’s have manufactured and edited to suit themselves, I find. They often leave you with more questions than answers. The best ones are open to interpretation enough to allow you in; allowing the source material to speak for itself. The worst ones rely on talking heads too much and can feel very manipulative.
Jim and Andy: The Great Beyond, is fortunately much more of the former than the latter. However, two days after watching this mind-blowing exposé of how Jim Carrey behaved on set of the excellent Man On The Moon, playing genius / lunatic Andy Kaufman, I am still left pondering what to think of it all. Is Carrey an ego maniac who belongs in a straight-jacket, or is he a hippie genius, dedicated to his art, who would do anything to achieve a perfect performance?
It focuses on a fully bearded Carrey reliving his memories of 20 years ago. Reinforced by a plethora of behind the scenes footage, which at turns is hilarious, shocking, confusing and revealing, in uncomfortable and fascinating ways. The premise is that at the time of being cast Kaufman’s spirit inhabited Carrey, allowing him to channel the actual man, and BE him, rather than merely play him!
Whatever your thoughts on method acting, and how indulgent that can be, it is always astonishing to see just how far he went! And why everyone else allowed him to get away with it? Director Milos Forman is forced to cope with never talking to “Jim”, only to “Andy”, and seems often at the point of break-down. Fellow cast members seem to deal with it in different ways too. Danny DeVito seems in awe; Courtney Love seems to embrace it; Paul Giamatti seems very uncomfortable. But the whole show goes ahead with Carrey as king. Simply extraordinary!
The thing is, both 1999 Jim and 2017 Jim never seem entirely insane, but rather totally in control and eloquent. It seems as if every “crazy” thing he did was a choice, conscious or unconscious, that as an actor he was happy to be part of; as if the performance was all that mattered. There have always been mental health questions about Carrey, and this throws a bright spotlight on his technique, personality and self-awareness. At some point you just have to say “wow” and to a degree applaud it.
Your enjoyment of it hinges on how much of a Carrey fan you are? If you have never liked or got him as a performer then you will be screaming at the screen in consternation. If you love his work then this is indespesible viewing! Either way, there is something wondrous about it! Just consider, Carrey won a Golden Globe for this role, and remains the only person ever to do so not to be Oscar nominated…
There is also a suggestion the whole thing is a joke, in typical Kaufman style, using the footage to create a trick on the audience… Documentaries, they can’t be trusted, can they? You decide.
Jim and Andy: The Great Beyond, is fortunately much more of the former than the latter. However, two days after watching this mind-blowing exposé of how Jim Carrey behaved on set of the excellent Man On The Moon, playing genius / lunatic Andy Kaufman, I am still left pondering what to think of it all. Is Carrey an ego maniac who belongs in a straight-jacket, or is he a hippie genius, dedicated to his art, who would do anything to achieve a perfect performance?
It focuses on a fully bearded Carrey reliving his memories of 20 years ago. Reinforced by a plethora of behind the scenes footage, which at turns is hilarious, shocking, confusing and revealing, in uncomfortable and fascinating ways. The premise is that at the time of being cast Kaufman’s spirit inhabited Carrey, allowing him to channel the actual man, and BE him, rather than merely play him!
Whatever your thoughts on method acting, and how indulgent that can be, it is always astonishing to see just how far he went! And why everyone else allowed him to get away with it? Director Milos Forman is forced to cope with never talking to “Jim”, only to “Andy”, and seems often at the point of break-down. Fellow cast members seem to deal with it in different ways too. Danny DeVito seems in awe; Courtney Love seems to embrace it; Paul Giamatti seems very uncomfortable. But the whole show goes ahead with Carrey as king. Simply extraordinary!
The thing is, both 1999 Jim and 2017 Jim never seem entirely insane, but rather totally in control and eloquent. It seems as if every “crazy” thing he did was a choice, conscious or unconscious, that as an actor he was happy to be part of; as if the performance was all that mattered. There have always been mental health questions about Carrey, and this throws a bright spotlight on his technique, personality and self-awareness. At some point you just have to say “wow” and to a degree applaud it.
Your enjoyment of it hinges on how much of a Carrey fan you are? If you have never liked or got him as a performer then you will be screaming at the screen in consternation. If you love his work then this is indespesible viewing! Either way, there is something wondrous about it! Just consider, Carrey won a Golden Globe for this role, and remains the only person ever to do so not to be Oscar nominated…
There is also a suggestion the whole thing is a joke, in typical Kaufman style, using the footage to create a trick on the audience… Documentaries, they can’t be trusted, can they? You decide.