What do you think?
Rate this book
The End of the Long Summer: Why We Must Remake Our Civilization to Survive on a Volatile Earth
For the past twelve thousand years, Earth’s stable climate has allowed human civilization to flourish. But this long benign summer is an anomaly in the Earth’s history and one that is rapidly coming to a close. The radical experiment of our modern industrial civilization is now disrupting our planet’s very metabolism; our future hinges in large part on how Earth responds. Climate change is already bearing down, hitting harder and faster than expected. The greatest danger is not extreme yet discrete weather events, such as Hurricane Katrina or the calamitous wildfires that now plague California, but profound and systemic disruptions on a global scale. Contrary to the pervasive belief that climate change will be a gradual escalator ride into balmier temperatures, the Earth’s climate system has a history of radical shifts–dramatic shocks that could lead to the collapse of social and economic systems.
The question is no longer simply how can we stop climate change, but how can we as a civilization survive it.
The guiding values of modern culture have become dangerously obsolete in this new era. Yet as renowned environmental journalist Dianne Dumanoski shows, little has been done to avert the crisis or to prepare human societies for a time of growing instability. In a work of astonishing scope, Dumanoski deftly weaves history, science, and culture to show how the fundamental doctrines of modern society have impeded our ability to respond to this crisis and have fostered an economic globalization that is only increasing our vulnerability at this critical time. She exposes the fallacy of banking on a last-minute technological fix as well as the perilous trap of believing that humans can succeed in the quest to control nature. Only by restructuring our global civilization based on the principles that have allowed Earth’s life and our ancestors to survive catastrophe——diversity, redundancy, a degree of self-sufficiency, social solidarity, and an aversion to excessive integration——can we restore the flexibility needed to weather the trials ahead.
In this powerful and prescient book, Dumanoski moves beyond now-ubiquitous environmental buzzwords about green industries and clean energy to provide a new cultural map through this dangerous passage. Though the message is grave, it is not without hope. Lucid, eloquent, and urgent, The End of the Long Summer deserves a place alongside transformative works such as Silent Spring and The Fate of the Earth .
The question is no longer simply how can we stop climate change, but how can we as a civilization survive it.
The guiding values of modern culture have become dangerously obsolete in this new era. Yet as renowned environmental journalist Dianne Dumanoski shows, little has been done to avert the crisis or to prepare human societies for a time of growing instability. In a work of astonishing scope, Dumanoski deftly weaves history, science, and culture to show how the fundamental doctrines of modern society have impeded our ability to respond to this crisis and have fostered an economic globalization that is only increasing our vulnerability at this critical time. She exposes the fallacy of banking on a last-minute technological fix as well as the perilous trap of believing that humans can succeed in the quest to control nature. Only by restructuring our global civilization based on the principles that have allowed Earth’s life and our ancestors to survive catastrophe——diversity, redundancy, a degree of self-sufficiency, social solidarity, and an aversion to excessive integration——can we restore the flexibility needed to weather the trials ahead.
In this powerful and prescient book, Dumanoski moves beyond now-ubiquitous environmental buzzwords about green industries and clean energy to provide a new cultural map through this dangerous passage. Though the message is grave, it is not without hope. Lucid, eloquent, and urgent, The End of the Long Summer deserves a place alongside transformative works such as Silent Spring and The Fate of the Earth .
320 pages, Hardcover
First published June 2, 2009
10 people are currently reading
171 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
August 3, 2009
Dianne Dumanoski has produced a well-written and well-organized manual for makling the transition to what she calls the "Planetary Era." She defines the Planetary Era as the era in which we are currently living, the era in which we have as a species forced the planetary system of earth beyond its normal operating range, and in which we must face the future together as a global community. The aim of the era must be "to achieve a reasonable accommodation with a nature that will always defy control." Reviewing the evidence for climate change lucidly and succinctly, she lifts up the problem with the ozone hole as the wake-up call to humanity that we have affected the Earth's atmosphere as a system. She reviews options for a techno-fix to the problem of climate change and determines that there are none that are sure to work or that do not have the potential of devastating side effects. She points out that humans are survivors by nature but also that we are losing our adaptability and flexibility and thereby our suvivability through our increasing specialization and globalization. She advocates preventive adaptability, functional redundancy, and the preservation of knowledge as ways to approach the future with "honest hope" and a chance for surviving what lies ahead. I am especially impressed by her integration of the Gaia hypothesis and the Medea hypothesis to produce a meaningful assessment of nature -- a system of which we are a part and on which we depend for our survival but one which can exterminate us as easily as it has 99% of all life forms that have ever existed. She is rightly dismissive of the colonizing space option of saving humanity and points out that we are and always will be of the Earth, our only home. As a global community, we must fight to save the version of the Earth on which we currently live but be ready to adapt to versions of the Earth that may lie in our future, if we are to have one. This book should be required reading in high schools and universities throughout the world.
July 23, 2020
A masterfully well-written synthesis of what we know about climate change, lessons to be learned, and how to look at our common future.
October 29, 2019
A brilliant philosophical, cultural and scientific affirmation that we’re f****d unless we get our act together. Must stop reading all these scary books.
July 25, 2016
Can i bin this under "horror"? Seriously, the image that came to mind as I was finishing this book was that someday in the distant future there will be myths told about how humanity's ancestors once sent machines into space and walked on the moon.
I have to admit I was a bit offended by what I took to be a somewhat flippant ridicule of the proposition put forth by many, including Stephen Hawking, that our best hope at long-term survival is to make it off this planet.
I don't have a strong enough grasp of the methods behind the scientific analysis the author references to be able to say how solid her predictions are, but if her view of the coming century is anywhere near correct, and her vision for how humanity must change in order to survive is accurate -- then we are well and truly fucked.
Forget the technological amenities of modern life like cell phones and streaming media. Hell, for that matter forget books -- we'll be back to oral traditions and wearing animal skins.
...And there won't be a second chance to reach the stars.
September 14, 2012
I guess I would call this book hopefully apocalyptic...it details the continued argument for the existence of climate change. Unlike authors like Sachs, who see the meshing of economic growth and sustainability, or focusing on the reinvention of processes vis-a-vis Cradle to Cradle, Dumanowski takes a human centered view of climate. Her basic argument seems to be that humans have only been on the planet for a short time, but indeed have proven to be an adaptable, albeit vulnerable species. She argues that while climate change is certain, and that even if we stop emitting GHGs now, climate will change, that it is expected that humans should be able to adapt and survive despite the challenges- though these adaptations may have to be extreme.
She sets the stage by saying: 1. human activity is pushing the balances of natural gases in the atmosphere way beyond normal, and 2. despite climatic stability over the past 11,700 years- benign by historical standards-are over. Therefore, humans must take evasive action in order to shockproof and disaster-proof (DRR anyone?) ourselves against these imminent changes. I appreciate that she is humble enough to say that humans, though we try to dominate the planet, and have enough influence to have created the Anthropocene, are going to be those who adapt- and that there is no other option. This is a very realistic, but again hopeful view- humans are adaptable- we live in variegated climate, conditions and contexts, and by and large survive. While we may not like it, she argues this will continue.
Dumanowski poses an interesting discussion on vulnerability- specifically who is more vulnerable- urban or rural dwellers. While one may be inclined to think the rural poor, who live on the fringes, may be more vulnerable to climate shifts, ocean rise, drought, and famine, this is only half the story. Due to the lack of contingency, and the last minute ("just in time") economy, the developed world has done away with warehouses, distribution and efficiency of businesses and supply chains, and in the event of catastrophe, many urban centers could only survive for a week. Maybe 6 months- any way you look at it, a crazy lack of reserve. It depends on best-case, existing conditions in order to continue, which, in the dynamic environment, are less likely to remain so stable.
Misconceptions- the extent of human power and influence on the environment, and the character of the nature we inhabit and act upon. Some economists have even said it makes sense to adapt to climate change later. Except we forget that with a 5 degree rise, we won't be able to adapt well.This demonstrates the dichotomy between economics and climate. I believe it is important as well to consider the size of the economy relative to the capacity of the environment. But economists do not take nature seriously, and cannot relinquish their belief in the stability of the natural world.
Dumanowski gives a very interesting and journalistic history of environmentalism, beginning with former civilizations that have slowly built up and finally collapsed all at once, like ht Byzantine empire, analogous with Gladwell's idea of a tipping point. As we continue to push climate systems with CO2, this will foster positive feedback which will make change all the more rapid: example: albedo in ice.
She proceeds by demonstrating the damage humans have wreaked, acting as an invasive species for the world-highlighting ozone depletion and CFCs, the conversion to oil based agriculture, and destroying any access to true nature as argued by McKibben.
Luckily, she continues to advocate that humans are a "foul weather species" and could be prepared for any changes through our competitive advantages of mobility, tool making and brains. The question she seems to avoid is- can we continue to do so? She offers that within humanity, there are different cultures that see the world differently, and could propose different solutions to climate problems.
One potential but problematic solution is geo-engineering. However, this obviously would have unintended consequences or externalities. Nonetheless, this still looks at climate like an economy in and of itself, even more so through the Keeling curve which shows how increased supply of CO2 has led to a rise in global temperatures. But who really knows if geo-engineering is a feasible solution- either morally or scientifically. Dumanowski makes a valid point that it is impossible if not absurd to value the sanctity of human life over the entirety that surrounds us.However, geo-engineering does decry the modern conception of nature as a machine. It strikes me a ridiculous from an economic standpoint that while everyone fixates on the free-market, yet neither that nor the superimposed controls to regulate it have worked tremendously well that we should have the audacity to try to apply the same model to the earth- instead of letting it regulate itself, we impose our own "fixes"which we have no basis for understanding the long term implications of. Everything put forth is a proposal- but not a guarantee. If anything, geo-enginneering needs to reflect a Cradle to cRadle, sustainable and natural approach to re-constituting the way humans affect the world by making us more akin to the natural environment, not trying ot dominate over it.
Moreover, despite the technological advances of our modern society, it has not dine much to make us less vulnerable against climate. While we view climate/environment as a machine we can control, it is in and of itself a loving organism that may in fact dominate us. The fact is disasters give us a preview of ho susceptible, and vulnerable we are to nature's invisible hand.
The change in some ways needs to come from within, reversion to small farms, diversifying and dispersing food sources, building in previously established functional redundancies (reverse integration), and modular structure. Dumanowski argues we used ot have these, but need to reincorporate them into our economic and social models if we are to survive and continue to adapt. "we have survived in the long run by keeping our options open and hedging our bets, not by running our societies as if we lived in a world where nothing bad ever happens."
In theory, there is enough food to go around, the problem is not one of plenty but of distribution. WE as a human society must accept responsibility and make the changes to ourselves and our habits if we are to continue to survive- what does that mean on a micro /individual level? We must not see the wolrd as a machine any longer, rather in terms of Gaia, or mother earth. Nor must we care for the planet in the form of stewardship, but interact with it on a level of partnership or symbiosis, mutual benefit- strictly utilitarian. In fact, we need earth a lot more than she needs us. This (gulp) may mean sacrificing economic growth (unless it is environmentally friendly) for existence. It means changing habits and not living beyond our means, and preserving some modicum of the resources for the future. At this point, we've already sacrificed and destroyed so much- coral, polar bears, islands, is it even worth saving? If the answer is yes, then we've got to change paradigms, and if not, then we can continue to live our hedonistic and carefree lives as is.
She sets the stage by saying: 1. human activity is pushing the balances of natural gases in the atmosphere way beyond normal, and 2. despite climatic stability over the past 11,700 years- benign by historical standards-are over. Therefore, humans must take evasive action in order to shockproof and disaster-proof (DRR anyone?) ourselves against these imminent changes. I appreciate that she is humble enough to say that humans, though we try to dominate the planet, and have enough influence to have created the Anthropocene, are going to be those who adapt- and that there is no other option. This is a very realistic, but again hopeful view- humans are adaptable- we live in variegated climate, conditions and contexts, and by and large survive. While we may not like it, she argues this will continue.
Dumanowski poses an interesting discussion on vulnerability- specifically who is more vulnerable- urban or rural dwellers. While one may be inclined to think the rural poor, who live on the fringes, may be more vulnerable to climate shifts, ocean rise, drought, and famine, this is only half the story. Due to the lack of contingency, and the last minute ("just in time") economy, the developed world has done away with warehouses, distribution and efficiency of businesses and supply chains, and in the event of catastrophe, many urban centers could only survive for a week. Maybe 6 months- any way you look at it, a crazy lack of reserve. It depends on best-case, existing conditions in order to continue, which, in the dynamic environment, are less likely to remain so stable.
Misconceptions- the extent of human power and influence on the environment, and the character of the nature we inhabit and act upon. Some economists have even said it makes sense to adapt to climate change later. Except we forget that with a 5 degree rise, we won't be able to adapt well.This demonstrates the dichotomy between economics and climate. I believe it is important as well to consider the size of the economy relative to the capacity of the environment. But economists do not take nature seriously, and cannot relinquish their belief in the stability of the natural world.
Dumanowski gives a very interesting and journalistic history of environmentalism, beginning with former civilizations that have slowly built up and finally collapsed all at once, like ht Byzantine empire, analogous with Gladwell's idea of a tipping point. As we continue to push climate systems with CO2, this will foster positive feedback which will make change all the more rapid: example: albedo in ice.
She proceeds by demonstrating the damage humans have wreaked, acting as an invasive species for the world-highlighting ozone depletion and CFCs, the conversion to oil based agriculture, and destroying any access to true nature as argued by McKibben.
Luckily, she continues to advocate that humans are a "foul weather species" and could be prepared for any changes through our competitive advantages of mobility, tool making and brains. The question she seems to avoid is- can we continue to do so? She offers that within humanity, there are different cultures that see the world differently, and could propose different solutions to climate problems.
One potential but problematic solution is geo-engineering. However, this obviously would have unintended consequences or externalities. Nonetheless, this still looks at climate like an economy in and of itself, even more so through the Keeling curve which shows how increased supply of CO2 has led to a rise in global temperatures. But who really knows if geo-engineering is a feasible solution- either morally or scientifically. Dumanowski makes a valid point that it is impossible if not absurd to value the sanctity of human life over the entirety that surrounds us.However, geo-engineering does decry the modern conception of nature as a machine. It strikes me a ridiculous from an economic standpoint that while everyone fixates on the free-market, yet neither that nor the superimposed controls to regulate it have worked tremendously well that we should have the audacity to try to apply the same model to the earth- instead of letting it regulate itself, we impose our own "fixes"which we have no basis for understanding the long term implications of. Everything put forth is a proposal- but not a guarantee. If anything, geo-enginneering needs to reflect a Cradle to cRadle, sustainable and natural approach to re-constituting the way humans affect the world by making us more akin to the natural environment, not trying ot dominate over it.
Moreover, despite the technological advances of our modern society, it has not dine much to make us less vulnerable against climate. While we view climate/environment as a machine we can control, it is in and of itself a loving organism that may in fact dominate us. The fact is disasters give us a preview of ho susceptible, and vulnerable we are to nature's invisible hand.
The change in some ways needs to come from within, reversion to small farms, diversifying and dispersing food sources, building in previously established functional redundancies (reverse integration), and modular structure. Dumanowski argues we used ot have these, but need to reincorporate them into our economic and social models if we are to survive and continue to adapt. "we have survived in the long run by keeping our options open and hedging our bets, not by running our societies as if we lived in a world where nothing bad ever happens."
In theory, there is enough food to go around, the problem is not one of plenty but of distribution. WE as a human society must accept responsibility and make the changes to ourselves and our habits if we are to continue to survive- what does that mean on a micro /individual level? We must not see the wolrd as a machine any longer, rather in terms of Gaia, or mother earth. Nor must we care for the planet in the form of stewardship, but interact with it on a level of partnership or symbiosis, mutual benefit- strictly utilitarian. In fact, we need earth a lot more than she needs us. This (gulp) may mean sacrificing economic growth (unless it is environmentally friendly) for existence. It means changing habits and not living beyond our means, and preserving some modicum of the resources for the future. At this point, we've already sacrificed and destroyed so much- coral, polar bears, islands, is it even worth saving? If the answer is yes, then we've got to change paradigms, and if not, then we can continue to live our hedonistic and carefree lives as is.
June 18, 2018
This is a clearly written and well-organized book that that describes how our current planetary civilization must transition to the "Planetary Era." This is the era in which we are currently living, in which the human species forced Earth's living planetary system beyond its normal operating range, and in which we must face the future together as a global community. Dianne Dumanoski explains how climate change, pollution, ozone layer destruction, species loss etc are all just symptoms of a larger problem, and suggests means to restructure human society to cope with fast-changing planetary systems.
Dumanoski discusses everythig from the Ozone Hole issue, ice core data, historic climate change, the rise of civilization, geoengineering, and the vulnerability and apathy of governments to plan for the future. She also discusses the survivability of human civiilization in a changing world.
I found the book interesting, with minimal hand-wringing by the author. This is one of the few climate change books that I've come across that deals with the larger picture, looks at where we stand realsitically, and has a long term (though not easy) solution to human survival.
"...in bringing the long summer to a premature close and engaging with vast planetary systems, we have opened the door to nature's return as a major, perhaps decisive force in human history." - Dianne Dumanoski.
September 27, 2018
Weaving together lessons from anthropology, geology, recorded history, biology, climatology, chemistry, philosophy, and economics, the author makes a compelling case for stark change. Overall, her outlook is bitterly romantic (in the tragic, hopeful sense) while she makes the case for humanity to face a new reality with determined openness to cooperation and embracing the coming change with grit and grace. She rightly points out how very new our current version of civilization is (both in the history of the Earth and in human history). "There is no guarantee that the centuries ahead will unfold as some recognizable version of life we live today. ... Over the past 11,700 years, humans have enjoyed the climatic blessings of the long summer, an interglacial period that has been extraordinarily lengthy and tranquil. This rare interlude in climate history, this special landscape of possibility, has allowed humans over millennia to construct a global civilization. Now, as we face its end, tomorrow's possibilities may be altogether different." -- this sums up her general premise.
May 17, 2023
The scariest book I’ve read since Cormac McCarthy’s “The Road” except this one is nonfiction.
January 6, 2014
The End of the Long Summer, by Dianne Dumanoski expresses views on why Earth's environment is spiraling out of control. It beings by talking about the future and stresses that if action isn't taken immediately, drastic climate changes will take place, and it is too late to prevent any catastrophe; survival is the only choice. The book informs the reader that with every spray of CFC's, our ozone is depleting. In addition, the book makes a point that nature will eventually take over, the existence of life has been during one of Earth's calmer phases. It is natural for the climate to drastically change, hence the phrase, "violate Earth" in the title. Yes climate change is natural, but humans have not exactly helped to prolong our calm "summer" that humans have been living in. Beating this climate monster is out of the picture, but survival isn't.
I enjoyed the book because I genuinely care about our environment, and I don't want to see it, for lack of a better word, die. I also liked how it didn't feel like I was reading a textbook the whole time, yet I still feel like a more educated person after reading it. There are some bits of humor, but that might've been the drama of Earth's current circumstance.
Due to the informative nature of the book, some parts of the book were a little dry. This was because it was just fact followed by fact, and some of the numbers went into my head and right out. I don't recommend reading this book while drowsy because it will put you to sleep and make the book impossible to get through. This book isn't a leisurely read, but that doesn't mean it's not an important read.
I may be bias because I want to study geology and our Earth in college, but I believe everyone should read this book. We are all part of the problem and we all need to be part of the solution. And how can we fix it if we don't know the problem? This book can inform our population and increase the chance of human survival.
I enjoyed the book because I genuinely care about our environment, and I don't want to see it, for lack of a better word, die. I also liked how it didn't feel like I was reading a textbook the whole time, yet I still feel like a more educated person after reading it. There are some bits of humor, but that might've been the drama of Earth's current circumstance.
Due to the informative nature of the book, some parts of the book were a little dry. This was because it was just fact followed by fact, and some of the numbers went into my head and right out. I don't recommend reading this book while drowsy because it will put you to sleep and make the book impossible to get through. This book isn't a leisurely read, but that doesn't mean it's not an important read.
I may be bias because I want to study geology and our Earth in college, but I believe everyone should read this book. We are all part of the problem and we all need to be part of the solution. And how can we fix it if we don't know the problem? This book can inform our population and increase the chance of human survival.
Read
September 23, 2009Dianne Dumanoski, in her book, “The End of the Long Summer: Why We Must Remake Our Civilization to Survive on a Volatile Earth,” writes with great breadth and depth about what she calls the planetary era. Since the beginning of this era, in the middle of the twentieth century, it has become clear that man-made global climate change — and she doesn’t waste time trying to convince the deniers — is part of a deeper problem, the impact of human civilization on a whole set of planetary systems (species diversity; species abundance; nitrogen, phosphorous and sulfur cycles; fresh water systems, etc).
See my complete review here:
http://sierravoices.com/2009/09/book-...
See my complete review here:
http://sierravoices.com/2009/09/book-...
June 15, 2010
Dumanoski's thesis that climate change is fast upon us and far more unpredictable than generally imagined is undoubtedly truer than I'd like to believe. For example her contention that ozone depletion is a wake-up call that is generally ignored & that except for pure luck we might ignored it until much too late or made it worse with a chemically plausible freon substitute is well documented & convincing. It is hard to doubt that other catastrophes are waiting in the wings which are totally unknown to us & which may bite us badly. Unfortunately, once she has made her point she seems unable to figure out where to go with it and tends to repeat herself. I intend to finish the book but I could have wished for better.
Want to read
October 3, 2009Off this review:
The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution
By Richard Dawkins (Free Press)
After sparking global controversy even among atheists with The God Delusion, Cambridge biologist Richard Dawkins takes a more emollient and fact-based approach in dismantling his latest foe, creationist-fostered opposition to modern evolutionary theory. Dawkins clearly hopes that the burden of evidence (he culls from an astounding number of sources) will change minds, eloquently and carefully walking readers through the facts. However, with more than 40 percent of Americans rejecting evolution, the book may best serve to strengthen the position of the already converted.
The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution
By Richard Dawkins (Free Press)
After sparking global controversy even among atheists with The God Delusion, Cambridge biologist Richard Dawkins takes a more emollient and fact-based approach in dismantling his latest foe, creationist-fostered opposition to modern evolutionary theory. Dawkins clearly hopes that the burden of evidence (he culls from an astounding number of sources) will change minds, eloquently and carefully walking readers through the facts. However, with more than 40 percent of Americans rejecting evolution, the book may best serve to strengthen the position of the already converted.
August 8, 2015
Diane Dumanoski's message is fantastic, but I had a hard time with her writing style. I felt that the book was repetitive and drawn out with a lot of superfluous language that could have cut the book down to 2 or 3 chapters. I feel like I need to read it again to try to understand it better, but I was so bored the first time through that I dread the thought of investing more of my time into it. Especially when there are captivating authors out there dispensing the same information in a more concise manner.
September 9, 2009
sobering as expected.
overall this is not new information to me, but the book cover to cover is what thinking people of all ages need to digest. we won't be "fixing" things as much as figuring out how to live in the inevitably changed world only decades away. civilizations seldom seem to be able to act with the long view in mind. we only do the fight or flight thing very well.
i'm needing to know how *i* spend the next 20 years in light of this.
hugely important book.
overall this is not new information to me, but the book cover to cover is what thinking people of all ages need to digest. we won't be "fixing" things as much as figuring out how to live in the inevitably changed world only decades away. civilizations seldom seem to be able to act with the long view in mind. we only do the fight or flight thing very well.
i'm needing to know how *i* spend the next 20 years in light of this.
hugely important book.
May 3, 2010
This book is terribly informative. Actually, it is terrifying. Dianne's prose is turgid and hipboots are required for slogging through her paragraphs. However, her facts and conclusions are alarmingly clear. While I was finishing the last chapter the news reported the massive oil spill to reinforce her message that human hubris, unless checked, will do us in.
Read
June 25, 2012 Really heavy in that we are at a crucial time in history and he give us some ways to try to guide or changing to help and not use up the planet, and survive the coming times. Any one still thinking we can just go on and on with out being concious of our impact on Earths balance, is asleep at the wheel as most of us seem to be.
Zeke
Zeke
October 7, 2009
A supremely cogent questioning of the modern "Progress" myth, followed by a caution to the effect that we'd be well-advised to "hang loose" during the coming very long period of ecological disruption. This is a fine book.
February 22, 2010
This is a book that everyone must read!
February 11, 2010
Starts out with very inspiring reasons for drastic changes to our civilization to deal with climate change but dwindles into history and philosophy without outlining the changes.
November 15, 2010
One of the best researched analysis of the impact of man-made climate change in what the author calls the 'planetary era'.
July 28, 2012
If you think climate change is bunk - read this.
October 15, 2012
I just read this for the second time, and bought my own copy.
Want to read
February 24, 2013humphries rec
Want to read
November 16, 2016I think this book is a life lesson about surviving, they give lessons and tips on how you can survive and I think this is a great book and everyone should read it.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews