Thad Roberts is clearly a sociopath. Ben Mezrich seems to be a sociopath too, the way he fawns over Thad and takes his silly excuses. And I'm highly sThad Roberts is clearly a sociopath. Ben Mezrich seems to be a sociopath too, the way he fawns over Thad and takes his silly excuses. And I'm highly suspect of anyone who likes this book or identifies with Thad. ...more
This is not the book I intended to put on hold with the library. But it is what I got. A 4th grade social studies book. It'll make a good coffee tableThis is not the book I intended to put on hold with the library. But it is what I got. A 4th grade social studies book. It'll make a good coffee table book for a few weeks and I can start learning about Iceland with the basics. ...more
Debating 4 or 5 stars. I was pretty enamored with Cloud Atlas, except the Adam Ewing chapters, which start and end the book. Hated those. Hated the voDebating 4 or 5 stars. I was pretty enamored with Cloud Atlas, except the Adam Ewing chapters, which start and end the book. Hated those. Hated the voice, the tone, the period language, and the fact that one key character just popped up at the end and I wasn't able to figure out if he'd been even mentioned previously (hard to search audiobooks). I probably would have quit the book if the first section had gone on much longer, and was disappointed at the end that I still hated it and this whole complicated creation went out on on a bad note.
But the rest, I loved the rest! I love books with layers and themes and such. ...more
What the hell is this supposed to be? Chick lit? Too misogynist. A Serious Novel? Too slapstick. Social Satire (as the summaries say)? Only if you donWhat the hell is this supposed to be? Chick lit? Too misogynist. A Serious Novel? Too slapstick. Social Satire (as the summaries say)? Only if you don't know the difference between satire are cliche.
I was about 1/2 done when I realized it was supposed to be comedy. Not the witty verbal comedy that I usually like, but low-brow gross-out comedy that should be staring Jack Black and Vince Vaughn. The kind of comedy where the humor comes from someone falling off a deck or getting stoned on pain killers and giving a bad speech. The kind of comedy that is more uncomfortable than funny.
Maybe all the falling down would be funny in a movie with a good physical actor, but its not written well enough to be funny in words. As a gross-out comedy it still didn't make sense. Too much reliance on 40-years past back-story to develop motivations. Sorry Maggie Shipstead, Vince Vaughn will never be Sterling because who could possibly play Winn both at both 60 and 20? And how would the fill the first 1/2 of the movie without anything humorous happening? And who would possible want to see it?...more
I suppose by definition, when you write a memoir you’re assuming that people will be interested in your life. And when I read a memoir, I’m concedingI suppose by definition, when you write a memoir you’re assuming that people will be interested in your life. And when I read a memoir, I’m conceding that I am interested in the writer’s life. But this memoir says that in such an egotistical way that I was left wondering who the hell Ira Wagner thinks he is that anyone would read this.
First off, the prose is so melodramatic and overreaching that it makes me cringe. It’s so obviously an English 101 writing assignment (or if not literally an assignment, the work of someone still learning how to write), complete with clichés, repetitiveness and trying way too hard to sound lyrical. It felt obvious too that he tried way too hard be fair and not to criticize, at the expense of owning his own story and experiences. How many times can you say “I’m not criticizing, just stating the fact. That is just the way it was.” The editor could have cut pages from the book by deleting that useless phrase every time it appeared, along with any and all paragraphs that contain with “I don’t remember…”
Secondly, there is something missing. He talks about the stress and struggles of living an Amish life, but doesn’t ever say what is stressful about it. He is quite upset that his neighbors are proudly ignorant; it’s a huge gulf between them and one of the big reasons he doesn’t want to stay Amish, but he never says what topics they’re proudly ignorant on. He goes on and on and on about his fears about all the bad things he’s done, without ever mentioning what those things might be. He left and returned like many of his peer group. He drank and bought a car at a time when he wasn’t a member of the community, like many in his peer group. He disappointed his parents and dumped his girlfriend, like so many teenagers and young adults do in every culture. Yes, these are bad, but they don’t seem as unforgivable as he makes them out, especially because he was forgiven for them. I felt like he must have done bigger stuff he just didn’t bother to describe. Or maybe he just lacks the perspective to see that those things are not that exceptional.
Thirdly and I suppose this is a petty criticism, this book has the misfortune of being misnamed. It’s not about Growing Up Amish, it’s about Wagner’s back-and-forth relationship to the Amish culture and eventual apostasy, all of which took place in his teenage and adult life. It doesn’t get at those little curiosities of daily life that entice someone to read a book about growing up in a culture different from our own. Do they have hot water? How do they cook? If electric service is not allowed in the home, is it allowed in other Amish structures, like the schools and businesses? What about natural gas service? How do they do laundry? Do women work outside the home or schools? What are typical meals? I don’t fault the author for not pandering to curiosities; they’re not what his book is about. But they are what the title of his book indicates the book is about and honestly they’d probably have been more interesting.
Fourth, there was one passage about his relationship with Sarah that majorly hit a nerve. I won’t begrudge him having a failed relationship. That’s a fact of life. I won’t even begrudge him for getting engaged to a woman he didn’t love. That too seemed part of the culture. But there was one passage where he says something like “We were very compatible. She loved me intensely and would have been a loyal wife. But I didn’t feel anything for her”. Is that you’re idea of compatible? What kind of sexist egomaniac do you have to be to think that that is what “compatible” means? At least he had the sense to leave before he could drag the poor girl into a one-sided marriage, but even then he seems to feel more guilty about the break up than about than about stringing her along for so long.
Fifth, what did the Mennonite church offer that the Amish didn't? A little extra undefined "freedom"? ...more