Carrie's 40 Books for 2012 Reading Challenge

[Carrie]

My goal this year is to read 40 books. I'll continue to update this post with books I read, but will give each book its own post below, including any review I write. All reviews may contain spoilers, so be warned.

1. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo Stieg Larsson, Read 1/4/12 (4 stars)
2. The Wedding Gift Marlen Suyapa Bodden, Read 1/9/12 (2 stars)
3. The Girl Who Played With Fire Stieg Larsson, Read 1/17/12 (5 stars)
4. The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference Malcolm Gladwell, Read 1/25/12 (3 stars)
5. Down Came the Rain: My Journey Through Postpartum Depression Brooke Shields, Read 2/4/12 (1 star)
6. The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest Stieg Larsson, Read 3/27/12 (4 stars)
7. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies Seth Grahame-Smith, Read 4/6/12 (3 stars)
8. Fifty Shades of Grey E.L. James, Read 5/9/12 (2 stars)
9. Fifty Shades Darker E.L. James, Read 5/15/12 (1 star)
10. 1Q84 Haruki Murakami, Read 6/13/12 (3 stars)
11. Deadlocked Charlaine Harris, Read 6/24/12 (2 stars)
12. After Life Rhian Ellis, Read 7/4/12 (4 stars)
13. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks Rebecca Skloot, Read 7/8/12 (5 stars)
14. Amy and Isabelle Elizabeth Strout, Read 7/14/12 (4 stars)
15. I, Robot, Isaac Asimov Read 7/23/12 (3 stars)
16. The Dip: A Little Book That Teaches You When to Quit Seth Godin, Read 7/25/12 (2 stars)
17. The Second Time Around, Mary Higgins Clark, Read 7/29/12 (2 stars)
18. The Little Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupery, Read 8/3/12 (5 stars)
19. The Tortilla Curtain, T.C. Boyle, Read 8/4/12 (3 stars)
20. Daughter of the Bamboo Forest, Sheng-Shih Lin, Read 8/12/12 (2 stars)
21. The Highly Sensitive Child: Helping Our Children Thrive When the World Overwhelms Them, Elaine N. Aron, Read 8/15/12 (3 stars)
22. Half-Blood Blues: A Novel, Esi Edugyan, Read 8/21/12 (4 stars)
23. Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard, Chip Heath & Dan Heath, Read 8/26/12 (5 stars)
24. Reading Magic: Why Reading Aloud to Our Children Will Change Their Lives Forever, Mem Fox, Read 8/27 (1 star)
25. Kitchen Confidential: Adventures in the Culinary Underbelly, Anthony Bourdain, Read 9/9/12 (2 stars)
26. Gone Girl, Gillian Flynn, Read 9/16/12 (5 stars)
27. How to Read Novels Like a Professor: A Jaunty Exploration of the World's Favorite Literary Form, Read 9/23/12 (2 stars)
28. The Commitments, Roddy Doyle, Read 9/26/12 (3 stars)
29. The Speckled Band, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Read 9/28/12 (4 stars)
30. The Adventure of the Stockbroker's Clerk, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Read 10/1/12 (3 stars)
31. The Adventure Of The Copper Beeches, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Read 10/2/12 (5 stars)
32. The Red Headed League, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Read 10/4/12 (3 stars)
33. Water for Elephants, Sara Gruen, Read 10/27/12 (3 stars)
34. Brave New World, Aldous Huxley, Read 10/30/12 (5 stars)
35. The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business, Charles Duhigg, Read 11/4/12 (4 stars)
36. My Horizontal Life: A Collection of One-Night Stands, Chelsea Handler, Read 11/12/12 (1 star)
37. And Then There Were None, Agatha Christie, Read 11/18/12 (5 stars)
38. Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance, Barack Obama, Read 11/30/12 (4 stars)
39. The Secret Thoughts of Successful Women, Valerie Young, Read 12/12/12 (3 stars)
40. The Giver, Lois Lowry, Read 12/24/12 (3 stars)
41. Elizabeth Street: A Novel Based On True Events, Laurie Fabiano, Read 12/28/12 (4 stars)

[Carrie]

Read: 1/4/12 ****

I didn't write a formal review for this one, but I read it very quickly. Quite the page turner, and I was very interested in reading the rest of the series as quickly as possible. I don't typically like this genre, but Larsson's style hooked me.

[Carrie]

Read: 1/9/12 **

Review: I thought the plot and a few of the characters (in particular Clarissa, Miss Mary, and Theodora) were interesting in theory. However, I thought the writing seemed amateurish and very stiff. The dialogue wasn't natural at all. Often times, the dialogue was so thick and confusing it was difficult to remember who was talking. I also thought the ending seemed rushed unnecessarily. She focused in great detail on certain aspects of the plot which didn't matter much (like the execution of the will), but then rushed through a few major plot points, which I won't name specifically here, but that occur on the last few pages of the book. I wasn't surprised to read after the fact that this was a first novel by a former attorney. That explained the tone and the oddly unnecessary legal details. In general, this seemed to me to be a great first draft, but should have run through a few more edits before being published.(

[Carrie]

Read: 1/17/12 *****

Review: I thought this book was actually much better than The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. While I understand the purpose of the first book being a bit slower (character development, background story development, etc.), I did get a little bored with Dragon once it was established what Martin Vanger had done, and I was in general not that interested in the conclusion re: the Wennerstrom Group.

However, I found myself not at all bored during Fire, and finally felt that urgency to continue reading that most people had talked about with regard to this series. The ending definitely insists that you read the conclusion of the series, which I also felt was something Dragon lacked.

I liked that we learned more about Lisbeth, and really got some good concrete reasons why she is a sympathetic character. You get the sense that she is in the first book, but it's nice to have the "evidence" that you get in this second book.

All in all, a great second book in the series, and this has really made me appreciate the first book more. Can't wait to read the third!

[Carrie]

Read: 1/25/12 ***

Review: I thought this book was well-written and fairly interesting, although there were some dry spots. The case studies were pretty interesting, especially the children's television and smoking studies. I did, after a while, though, feel like I was being beaten over the head with his thesis. I get it, Mavens, Connectors, etc. No need to repeat yourself over and over. All in all, I'm glad I read it, but I wouldn't recommend it, really. Do yourself a favor and just read the short article that this book was based on, and you'll get the same impact.

[Carrie]

Read: 2/4/12 *

Review: This book was one of the worst I've read in quite a while. I read it because I was interested in learning more about postpartum depression, not necessarily because it was Brooke Shields, who I've never been particularly interested in. The writing in this book was horrid. I seriously think I could write a better book right now. The unfortunate thing about this book is that I really do think she has an important story to share, but the tone of the writing was so irritatingly whiny and dramatic, she lost any empathy she managed to evoke in me almost as soon as it appeared. I think that if someone were not convinced of the validity of postpartum depression, this book might actually help to convince them that it doesn't exist. She comes across as a privileged, self-obsessed, wimpy diva who has never had to do anything on her own, and who struggled with the typical challenges any new mother faces, while at the same time having many advantages over the typical mother (ie., money, time off work, family support, hired help). I really don't think that's probably how she is, based on some interviews I've seen her do, but she did such an awful job telling her story, I think that's how it would come across to anyone unfamiliar with her. I would never recommend this book to someone, and was shocked to find out that it is recommended often by professionals to women suffering from postpartum depression. I can't see how the average mother could relate to really any of her struggles. Too bad she didn't hire a ghost writer.

[Carrie]

Read: 3/27/12 ****

Review: I didn't write a formal review for this book, but I didn't care for it as much as the second. It could have been that I had too much going on personally to be able to concentrate on it, but it felt a little laborious toward the end. However, I was happy to get a resolution, and I thought the triology overall was very well done.

[Carrie]

Read: 4/6/12 ***

Review: I liked this book a lot in theory, but in practice, it never really did much for me. It's a catch-22, I think, because you really need to have read Pride and Prejudice to enjoy the book, but if you've read Pride and Prejudice, you run the risk of being bored re-reading it. I think the situation was made worse for me, because I've read Pride and Prejudice several times (English major and this one seems to show up almost every syllabus). The zombie subplot just wasn't enough to really hold my interest, and I found that I had to force myself to get through it. I guess for me the bottom line is, there were some amusing lines in the book relating to the zombies, but after a few chapters of it, it gets a little old.

[Carrie]

Read: 5/9/12 **

Review: I read this book to see what the hype was about. The plot was silly, but I got sucked into the cliffhanger and read the next one. Overall, much ado about nothing.

[Carrie]

Read: 5/15/12 *

Review: Ugh. I got sucked into reading this because the first book ends with a cliffhanger, and I was interested in knowing what happened with Ana and Christian. This was seriously the worst book I've ever read. I thought the first was really poorly written, but the plot was somewhat interesting. The second book was written just as poorly with the dumbest, most unbelievable plot I've ever read. I wish I had the time back that I spent reading this.

[Carrie]

Read: 6/13/12 ***

Review: I've sat here for a while trying to come up with a justification of the 3 stars I gave this book, and it's really hard for me to do for some reason. I'm not sure what to say to give an impression of what this book is like, but I'll give it a shot.

First and foremost, it's gigantic. I read it in electronic format, so didn't realize until I started reading for a while and then noticed I was only 1% finished with the book, that it is nearly 1000 pages long in paper format. I only mention this because it's puzzling to me WHY this book had to be so long. I read somewhere that it's only the English version that was released as one book, rather than three, which makes a little sense. I should have treated the book as three separate books, vs. one large tome, the way I did. Once I was about 2/3 of the way finished with the book, it began to feel like a chore to me to get it finished.

Typically, if I'm in that situation with a book, I'll just give up, but Murakami's prose kept me going. I loved his writing style. It was elegant, but simple, and oddly detailed about the kind of minutae in life that I find interesting. (Please, Murakami, tell me in great detail about what Tengo purchased at the grocery store, how he prepared his simple dinner, and if he was satisfied with it after he ate it. Oh, you did. Over and over.)

I think my main issue with the book is having not come away with it with much of a sense of his message. This interesting story happens, and then it's over. What's the meaning of it? Maybe once I let it marinate a little, I'll come up with something, but at this point, I'm still just reeling from it.

Having really enjoyed his style, though, I may check out some more of Murakami's work. Hopefully his other books are shorter!

[Carrie]

Read: 6/24/12 **

Review: This was, so far, my least favorite book of this series. The main problem, I felt, was the pace of the book. Generally, Harris holds my attention very easily, weaving together her main plot with the subplots. That was not the case this time. I felt like I was being dragged along through a never-ending story that she really didn't feel like telling. Multiple times, I found myself wishing she'd just get to the point already. And, ultimately, I really just didn't care so much about who killed Kym Rowe. The cluvial door and Sookie's indecision around it was annoying, although I did like how it was used in the end. I have read other reviews that have commented on the fact that Harris is setting Sookie and Sam up to be together, but I didn't really get that impression. It wouldn't be the worst thing, I guess. Either way, I'm starting to lose interest in this series overall. Harris does a great job of bring us back into her little world in every book, but this time, for the first time, I just didn't feel like staying there.

[Carrie]

Read: 7/4/12 ****

Review: **spoiler alert** I really enjoyed this book. In fact, I'd say it's probably my favorite book read this year so far. The basic plot is that we know the protagonist Naomi Ash has killed someone and buried his body. We learn this in the first few lines of the book. The rest of the book provides Naomi's background, including her childhood in New Orleans, where she was raised by her mother who was a medium, and their move to Train Line, New York, which is a city known for its connection to spiritualism. We also get to know the adult Naomi, how she came to know and have a relationship with the deceased (Peter Morton), why she killed him, and how she handles it when his body is discovered and the investigation surrounding his death ensues.

Ellis' writing style is comfortable and simple, and really draws the reader into the mindset of her characters. She is able to take the simplicity and complexity of life and intertwine them. "A dying bee crept across the porch floor, heading for the steps, though it couldn't have known they were there."

Because you know Naomi killed Peter, there is no suspense about what she did, but the suspense Ellis creates for the reader in revealing why she did it is impressive. Also, the sympathy I felt for Naomi grew and grew until at the peak of the novel, I was crying for her, despite knowing she was a murderer.

All in all, great book. It's inspired me to check out more of the "whydoneit" genre

[Carrie]

Read: 7/8/12 *****

Review: **spoiler alert** I gave this book 5 stars not primarily because of how it was written (although I did enjoy the more 'novel' feeling this book has, as compared most non-fiction books), but because of the story Skloot shares. I believe the story of Henrietta Lacks, and the abuse suffered by her and her family, in addition to the issues of medical experimentation, informed consent, and bioethics is one everyone should hear.

Ostensibily, the book is about HeLa, which is the famous cell line grown from a sample of Henrietta Lacks' cancerous cervix, taken without her knowledge or consent. That, in and of itself, is a phenomenally interesting subject. HeLa was the first immortal cell line, meaning it grew consistently (and is still growing), making it ideal for cell-based scientific research. Because of the HeLa cell line, scientists were able to make advancements that contributed to stem cell research, in vitro fertilization, and cloning whole animals. Studying the HeLa cell line led ultimately to the discovery that normal human cells have forty-six chromosomes, and that variances from that result in disorders such as Turner syndrome, Klinefelter syndrome and Down's syndrome. HeLa was used to test the effects of steroids, chemotheraphy drugs, hormones, vitamins and environmental stress, resulting in the development of cancer treatments, as well as improvements in organ transplantation. It was instrumental in the development of and testing of the successful polio vaccine, which was responsible for saving countless lives.

Such a significant contribution was made by Henrietta Lacks to the scientific community, not to mention the overall quality of life of all people, but she had no knowledge of it whatsoever, and neither did her family, until 20 years after Henrietta's death from cervical cancer.

Henrietta and her family grew up during a time when Johns Hopkins (the hospital where she was treated for cervical cancer) was a feared predator in the local poor black community. They were taught as children that Johns Hopkins was a place to be feared, all doctors were, really, and Skloot does a great job of juxtaposing the gratitude felt by the scientific and medical communities to HeLa with the treatment by those same communities of Henrietta Lacks, the person, and her family.

This story is touching and inspirational, particularly in the way the Lacks family is able to come to peace with their mother's death and her place in scientific history. But, it is infuriating as a person, in that many of these ethical dilemmas regarding tissue "donation" and bioethics still exist today. In order to understand where we are, we need to understand where we've been. This book is a step in the right direction for all people to getting to that point.

[Carrie]

Read 7/14/12 ****

I think every mother of a daughter should read this book at some point. Strout does a wonderful job exploring the complexities of a mother-daughter relationship in a way that is much less cliche than typical. My daughters are young enough that I couldn't quite relate directly to the challenges Isabelle is facing now that Amy is going through puberty and exploring her budding sexuality. However, my oldest daughter is old enough that I could relate to a lot of the second-guessing and introspection one faces as a mother once your daughter starts to exhibit those characteristics and behaviors that you KNOW came from you, or from how you parented her. It's a terrifying feeling once you realize how permanent the impact is that you have on their developing personalities, and I imagine that terror is debilitating if and when it leads to your daughter making a poor decision that could be very dangerous for her, as happens with Amy in the novel. How Isabelle is able to digest those choices and ultimately help Amy overcome her challenges is powerful and touching.

I accidentally returned this book to the library prior to copying down some of my favorite quotes, but I will say that I found Strout's prose to be very poetic. I liked the running metaphor using the nature in Shirley Falls to illustrate both Amy and Isabelle's development as individual women. I liked how Strout was able to take the mundane aspects of life and bring out the beauty in them.

This book could really become a five star book for me, I enjoyed it that much. I'll be reading more of Strout's work, and will likely re-read this and potentially update my rating.

[Carrie]

Read 7/23/12 ***

** spoiler alert ** I'm not a science fiction girl. I have to provide that caveat before writing any review of I, Robot. Part of what I don't like about science fiction is the scientific aspect of it. Long, detailed descriptions of things, locations, machines, etc. tend to lose my interest because they're so out of my frame of reference that I have difficulty imagining them or, sometimes, even understanding them. I chose to read I, Robot, though, because I'm trying to improve my understanding and appreciation of science fiction.

What I liked about this book is Asimov's impressive thinking. I had to keep reminding myself of when this book was written because it is pretty amazing that Asimov was able to envision some of the technology that is very close to what we have now. He obviously had an abundant imagination and a very good understanding of the scientific capabilities and possibilities of his time and the future. Pretty cool.

I also liked the fact that this book was broken down into several short stories, but tied together with one narrative (the retrospective of Dr. Calvin's life/scientific progression of robotics during her lifetime). This helped me deal with my fundamental problem of having trouble understanding the setting in most science fiction novels. Instead of getting bogged down in those types of intricate details, Asimov sets the scene, then focuses on one philosophical dilemma presented to the protagonists in the story. Although robots are governed by three seemingly simple rules (see description of book for those rules), the depth and amount of challenges created by individual interpretations of those rules was fascinating.

What I didn't like about the book was primarily the writing. It was bad. Really bad. I am a lover of beautiful prose, character description and development, and interesting dialogue. None of that showed up in this book. I get that Asimov was renowned more for his big thinking, rather than his skilled writing, but it was just too bad for me to get past.

All in all, a 3/5 for a science fiction book is pretty good for me, so I'd consider this a success. Maybe I'd read one of his Foundation novels if I found myself in the right frame of mind. But, I will probably try to find other science fiction writers who write on the same types of philosophical subjects as Asimov, but with better writing.

[Carrie]

Read 7/25/12 **

Review: This is a very short book, which is a good thing. The concept is very simple: quitting something at the right time (before you invest too much time or energy into doing something at which you won't be the best) is ideal to one's success. The idea is one needs to be able to assess a situation and either get out well before the Dip, or, lean into the Dip, and minimize the time spent there. What's the Dip, you ask? Well, "the Dip is the long slog between starting and memory." It's "the difference between the easy 'beginner' technique and the more useful 'expert' approach." It's the "long stretch between beginner's luck and real accomplishment." In other words, it's the part of working toward a goal when things aren't so much fun, and one encounters the first real challenges along the way. Godin maintains that the Dip creates scarcity, and scarcity creates value. If you can make it through the Dip, you'll be the best in the world at whatever you choose to do. He encourages you to define your own world, and minimize it if necessary to achieve this goal.

I agree entirely with this concept. Being able to identify the long-term goal and recognize what it takes to get there and what challenges one may encounter along the way during the Dip is crucial to success. I'm just not sure it takes 80 pages of discussion to get to that point. Godin gets pretty repetitive, which is amazing for such a short book, but I think it's just in an effort to reiterate his one and only point. That's what led to a two-star rating. I wouldn't recommend this one, except to very novice employees, or possibly even junior high or high school students. They may find value in it.

[Carrie]

Read 7/29/12 **

This book really was not good. I should preface this review by saying I don't love the mystery genre. This author was my mother's favorite, though, and I remember reading one of her books when I was a kid, and enjoying it, and it was on my bookshelf asking to be read, so there you go. However, I forgot how much of a literary snob I've become until I read this book.

First of all, there were a TON of editing mistakes. For example, one character's name is Milly, but the spelling of her name changed from Milly to Millie throughout the text. Another example is a misplaced set of quotations to include the characters spoken words and inner thoughts. Both of those things were indicative of the fact that this was not a cared for, loved, and poured-over manuscript. It felt like the author was contractually obligated to produce a 300 page book, and she threw it together without much thought.

That was also obvious by the shoddy plot. It was just, well, stupid. The characters were flat and stereotypical, the "mystery" was not so mysterious. It was crystal clear from the first chapter what had happened. And what happened was pretty stupid.

All in all, this was a bad book. Sorry, Mom.

[Carrie]

Read 8/3/12 *****

What can I say about this book that's not already been said a million times? Really, not much, so I'll keep it simple - it's a classic. Somehow, I made it to age 35 before reading it, but I'm glad I finally got around to it. Beautiful story of a man's struggle between his inner child and outward adult. My 5 year old is dying to read it, and I can't wait to share it with her. I think the writing is complex enough to keep an adult thinking and simple enough to keep a child interested. Five stars, for sure.

[Carrie]

Read 8/4/12 ***

** spoiler alert ** This wasn't my favorite Boyle book. I read it because I was interested in hearing an immigrant story that was a bit more modern than I've read before. Also, I don't have a lot of experience or knowledge about the Mexican immigrant experience, and I thought this would be a good way to learn a bit about that. I can't help but think that what I read is not true the experience most immigrants have. At least, I sure hope it isn't. Part of the reason I enjoy reading about immigrant stories is because you typically get picture of a very strong and omnipresent culture and how that integrates into the newly-entered culture (in this case, that of the United States). I also enjoy reading immigrant stories because they are often very inspirational. Typically, the immigrants experience significant challenges, heartache, and tragedy, but ultimately, it's worth it in the end. In this novel, neither of those was the case. You don't get a sense of Candido and America's culture really at all, except at the end when America wants the baby's cord in order to hang it on a tree in her hometown, in accordance with her family's tradition. You also don't get a sense of inspiration at all, either. Truly everything that can go wrong for these two Mexicans, does. Absolutely everything. And it started to wear on me after a while. When I got to the end and their blind infant is washed away by a mudslide, I really just couldn't take it anymore. I left their story thinking they should have stayed in Mexico, because it could not possibly have been as bad as their time in America, because at least they would have been surrounded by family and those who love them.

The Americans in the story are really just as bad. The female character (Kyra Mossbacher), in particular, is very flatly drawn. And Delaney Mossbacher is an obnoxious, sushi-eating, recycling "naturalist" who pontificates about the beauty of nature, but when he's confronted with nature in his own backyard (via the coyotes), he caves and builds fences and walls to keep it out. He likes nature in concept, but can't handle actual interaction with nature that isn't on his terms. Boyle cleverly uses the coyotes to parallel the Mexican immigrant experience and Delaney's reaction to it, and I think that was the most interesting aspect of the book. But, at the same time, it was pretty depressing. Delaney actually appreciates the coyotes on some level, commenting on their intelligence and beauty, but he never gets to that point with the Mexicans. In fact, he starts of sympathetic to their plight on a fundamental level, but ends up feeling nothing but pure hatred toward Mexicans because of the impact he perceives they have on his life.

All in all, it was beautiful, typical Boyle prose, but an uninspiring and depressing story.

[Carrie]

Read 8/12/12 **

**spoiler alert** I wanted to like this book, I really did. However, I just couldn't get myself to care about the characters much. I had a bit of a problem with the style the author has for storytelling. Primarily, she jumps from one character's perspective to another's quite often, making me feel anxious as a reader. Also, the pace of the book was similarly jumpy, in one case spanning the entire WWII in one chapter, only to jump back from another character's perspective to tell another side of the story. I think that if she would have taken a little more time to build each scene, it would have been permissible to do these types of things, but overall, it just felt disjointed to me.

Also, I really just felt terribly for Little Jade. She lost everyone and everything she loved, and only in the last paragraph of the book does one feel any sort of hope for her future. I didn't think that was enough to leave me with a sense of inspiration regarding Little Jade/Lee and her situation, but I get the sense the author was trying to convey that feeling. Again, if that scene or theme would have been elaborated on a bit more extensively, I think she (the author) could have gotten there.

All in all, this book has good bones, but not enough meat on them.

[Carrie]

Read 8/15/12 ***

**spoiler alert ** I read this book because I am the parent of a highly sensitive child, and I was hopeful that this might give me some clearer insight into what she feels, why she behaves the way she does, and, most importantly, what I can be doing to better parent her. Aron does a great job of explaining what a highly sensitive child (HSC) is, and why they behave the way they do. Her basic premise is that there's nothing inherently wrong with being highly sensitive, though our culture in the United States is not particularly conducive to those types of individuals (which, as she points out many times in the book, compromise approximately 15-20% of all temperament types.) So, as the parent as an HSC, one must reframe the behavior in a positive light, and make sure that, whenever possible, one makes the environment suitable for an HSC.

I definitely came away from the book with a clearer understanding of why my child does some of the things she does. Aron has clearly done much research in the field and is very passionate about it, so she really makes sure that subject is covered in depth. The problem with it, for me, was the defensive tone in which she talks about HSC. I thought she unnecessarily reminded the reader over and over and over again why it's a positive for one to be highly sensitive or to parent an HSC. This happened so much that it made me feel a little like Stuart Smalley reciting "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggoneit, people like my HSC." I mean, who's reading this book from the mindset of "my HSC is such a pain in the ass, let me read a book and figure out why I hate him so much?" Obviously, we all love our children and are insightful enough to have picked this book up, so we're kind of clued in to the fact that our kid is highly sensitive and that there are positive aspects to it. I don't know, it just bugged me after a while, but maybe I'm kind of sensitive too.

The other main problem I had with this book is I didn't come away from it with a clearer understanding as to how I can parent my child any better. I thought most of the advice given was either really obvious or really unrealistic. For example, my child tantrums like crazy when she doesn't get enough sleep. We figured out when she was an infant that she is one of those kids who gets hyperactive when she's overtired. So, we protect her bedtime like crazy in order to avoid those types of hyperactive rages whenever possible. I guess it's possible that people haven't figured this out on their own, but to me, that wasn't helpful advice.

Other advice she gives seemed very unrealistic and again, a little defensive. For example, she talks about preparing a "sound bite" for teachers, care givers, or others that will help them understand your HSC. The example she gives is "It may help you to know that my child is one of those 15 or 20 percent born with a very sensitive nervous system. He notices every subtlety, but is also easily overwhelmed when a lot is going on." I mean, really. How obnoxious would you seem if you said this to the mom hosting the play date as you're dropping your kid off? Certainly there's a better, less entitled way to handle that situation. Another example she gives is this response to people commenting on the fact that you have a sensitive child: "I rather like her sensitivity. Is there a specific thing she's doing that you have a problem with?" Uh, no crazy lady, I was just making conversation! I really truly do appreciate the uniqueness of a HSC. However, this type of suggested dialogue makes the parent seem defensive, overly protective of their child, and frankly, just rude.

All in all, I thought this book was helpful in understanding some of the psychology and physiology behind highly sensitive temperaments, but not helpful in the least from a parenting aspect.

[Johanna]

Sensory Integration and the Child

Have not heard of HSC, but is it something like kids with problems in Sensory integration?

[Nathan]

Carrie, have you read any other books on this subject? Could you recommend anything?

[Carrie]

Johanna wrote: "Sensory Integration and the Child

Have not heard of HSC, but is it something like kids with problems in Sensory integration?"

Hi Johanna. I'm certainly no expert on either topic, but I do think there's a difference between being highly sensitive and having sensory integration issues. One who is highly sensitive may also have sensory integration disorder, but they are not always linked. The term "highly sensitive" is more reflective of temperament, and not an official disorder the way sensory integration is.

Hope this helps!

[Carrie]

Trevor wrote: "Carrie, have you read any other books on this subject? Could you recommend anything?"


I have not, but I plan to. Once I research it a little more and get some more references, I'll definitely share. Are you asking because you think you may be a highly sensitive person? If so, the author of the highly sensitive child book also wrote a book about highly sensitive adults, and in it is a self-assessment. It may be a good place for you to start.

[Johanna]

Ok Carrie :) Thanks, we studied sensory integration in school for a bit so I got curious :)

[Nathan]

Carrie wrote: "I have not, but I plan to. Once I research it a little more and get some more references, I'll definitely share. Are you asking because you think you may be a highly sensitive person? If so, the author of the highly sensitive child book also wrote a book about highly sensitive adults, and in it is a self-assessment. It may be a good place for you to start."

No, not for myself. My younger brother is quite sensitive to things and my family doesn't know what it is. He doesn't like talking about it and sometimes it's quite irritating for everyone in our family, so I thought reading a book about highly sensitive people would be good for all of us. Please do share if you find other resources. I'll be on the lookout as well, now that I know books about it exist!

[Carrie]

Read 8/22/12 ****

** spoiler alert ** I thought this was a very good book. It's the first I've read from Edugyan, and very early on I decided to check out her other book, The Second Life of Samuel Tyne, because I found her writing style to be so beautiful. I also thought she was able to capture the voice of the narrator very authentically.

But, let me back up and give a plot summary. It's Berlin, just prior to WWII and the narrator, Sid Griffiths, is an American jazz musician (upright bass), who's part of a band called the Hot-Time Swinger. Also in the band are his childhood friend Chip Jones on drums, and Hieronymus (Hiero) Falk, a German (but half-African, so "stateless," according to the Nazis) trumpeter, who is the young outbreak star of the band, even garnering attention from Louis Armstrong.

Edugyan tells the story of this band, their rise to success, as well as the jealousy, affection, and comraderie between the band members as they are forced out of Berlin to Paris by the Nazis, and they receive their "big break" of meeting Louis Armstrong and cutting a record with him. They meet up with Delilah, a beautiful jazz singer who is affiliated with Armstrong, and she plays an integral role in their experience in Germany and France.

We learn in the first chapter that Falk is apprehended by the Nazis in Paris, sent to a concentration camp, and never heard from again and assumed dead. Their record "Half-Blood Blues" goes on to garner great success and Falk is a jazz hero for all future generations. Edugyan jumps back and forth between war-time and the 1990s, when Chip and Sid are heading back to Europe for a festival to celebrate Falk's music with a performance and a documentary about his life. Through Sid, we learn the circumstances of Falk's capture, as well as the story of the recording "Half-Blood Blues."

I found the plot to be very unlikely, but I was willing to suspend disbelief and just let Edugyan take me where she wanted to go. And I'm glad I did. Although it is highly unlikely most of this would have happened, it's a great story, beautifully told. Music is a big deal to me, but I think her descriptions of jazz are so eloquently delivered, that even a non-music fan could appreciate them.

Example: "The music should've sounded something like a ship's horn carrying across water -- hard, bright, clear. The kid, hell, he made it muddy, passing his notes not only over seas but through soil too. Sounded rich, which might've been fine for an older gate, but felt fake from him. The slow dialogue between him and us had a sort of preacher-choir feel to it. But there wasn't no grace. His was the voice of a country preacher too green to convince the flock. He talked against us like he begging us to listen. He wailed. He moaned. He pleaded and seethed. He dragged every damn feeling out that trumpet but hate. A sort of naked, pathetic way of playing. Like he done flipped the whole thing inside out, its nerves flailing in the air. He bent the notes, slurred them in a way made us play harder against him. And the more we disagreed, the strong he pleaded. But his pleading aint never ask for nothing, just seemed to be there for his its own damn sake. In a weird way, he sounded both old and like he touching the trumpet for the very first time." (p. 160).

I loved it. Such a unique and thorough way to describe his playing, and Sid's perception of it. I wonder if she's a musician herself.

I also loved how she explored the complex relationship between Hiero and Sid. Did Sid love Hiero, want to protect him, or was he jealous of him? Or all three? Or something else? I think she got to the heart of it with this passage: "Cause I admit it. He got genius, he got genius in spades. Cut him in half, he stil worth three of me. It ain't fair. It ain't fair that I struggle and struggle to sound just second-rate, and the damn kid just wake up, spit through his horn, and it sing like nightingales. It ain't fair. Gifts is divided so damn unevenly. Like God just left his damn sack of talents in a ditch somewhere and said, Go help yourselves, ladies and gents. Them's that get there fast can help themselves to the biggest ones. In every other walk of life, a jack can work to get what he want. But ain't no amount of toil going get you a lick more talent than you born with. Geniuses ain't made, brother, they just is. And I just was not." (p. 252).

I love that. It's so true, and such a raw emotion. Sid has talent, but it's not the same type of talent that Hiero has. But, the emotion he feels toward and about the music is the same, and he's right - that's just not fair.

There are two reasons why this isn't a 5 star. The first is that the ending felt a bit unfinished to me. I really wanted to understand better what happened to Hiero. But, maybe that's a testament to how clearly she developed these characters. I cared about them, and wondered about them. I needed to hear more about them.

The second is a minor thing, but bugged me. She did an impressive job with the American jazz dialect with Sid and Chip, but Hiero's voice was the same as theirs. He was a German. He would not have spoken the same way as the others. That bugged me.

All in all, I really enjoyed this book, and definitely plan to re-read in the future.

[Carrie]

Read 8/26/12, *****

I read this book because it was recommended by a colleague. In general, I have a difficult time getting quickly through most business books, but this was not the case at all. I thought the Heath brothers did a great job of breaking down a very daunting subject, change, into a simple metaphor, then illustrated their concepts with real-life case studies. I particularly liked that the case studies were told in a more conversational way than I normally notice in business books (it really spoke to my Elephant), but were backed up with real statistics (satisfying my Rider). I came away from this book with several ideas that I believe will be able to be implemented quickly within my department. I can't recall the last time I finished a business book, or any non-fiction book, for that matter, feeling so inspired. I highly recommend this one!

[Nathan]

Carrie wrote: "
Read 8/26/12, *****"

I quite enjoyed this book too! Much to my own surprise. :D It opened my eyes to how good a non-fiction/business book can be.

[Carrie]

Read 8/27/12, *

I'm not sure who the audience is for this book. I don't think you'd pick it up if you didn't already think reading aloud to children is a valuable exercise. But, the author spends the entire book selling the reader on the value of reading aloud, using anecdotal evidence and quotes from her own children's books. She doesn't use any statistics, studies, or any sort of empirical evidence whatsoever. It's all: I tried this with my kid and a few of my friend's kids and they turned out great. I was interested in hearing more of the reasons behind what specific benefits reading to your children can have, not just her personal belief that it is beneficial, because I too hold that personal belief.

If you didn't think reading aloud was valuable, why would you ever be interested in this book? I can't see any value in this book having been written, unless it's somehow required reading for parents known to object to reading to their children. And those people, I think, probably have bigger problems.

[Carrie]

Read 9/9/12, **

I enjoyed some aspects of this book, but overall didn't care much for it. I know Anthony Bourdain from his Travel Channel show, No Reservations, and know that he's a bit of an arrogant ass. So, I was prepared for that. What I wasn't prepared for were editing mistakes, a near constant use of the word "megalomaniac," and the belief that professional cooking is a heroic life that only the bravest, toughest, most impressive person (usually man) can enter into. Here, I thought that was the Navy SEALS. My bad.

The first part of the book was interested, and more what I was hoping for when I picked this book. Bourdain gives a rundown of his early years, what led to his interest in food, and his rocky career start. He tells his story in what appears to be a series of essays, or short stories, and the first part of the book, he does a nice job of making those stories flow logically and pleasantly into each other. It's the second part of the book wherein he loses me. His stories once he became a professional chef seemed to be told randomly, and without any sort of chronological order. I couldn't figure out what made him go from one place to another, and I didn't care for that feeling as a reader. I also couldn't figure out the point he was trying to make, other than he's a bad-a** motherf***er and we should all think about how cool he is to be able to be a professional cook for so long.

All in all, not my style.

[Carrie]

Read 9/16/12 *****

Review (with potential spoilers)

You know when you're reading a book, and you find yourself really relating to the characters' emotions, thoughts, actions, and you think to yourself "Yes! I feel this way too! I'm not alone or crazy in my life experience. Hooray!" And then, you realize the character you're relating most to is a sociopathic, megalomaniacal, pathological liar? Oops.

That's what Gone Girl did to me. Gillian Flynn created an addictive world starring Nick and Amy Dunne, the seemingly normal, relatable couple, going through the ups and downs of early marriage, facing a horrific experience wherein Amy has gone missing. As Flynn begins to build the backstory of Amy through her diary entries and Nick through his experience investigating his wife's disappearance, we begin to realize that all is not as it seems with the All-American couple. As soon as she creates a firm foundation upon which the reader can form an understanding of both Amy and Nick, Flynn just as quickly collapses it with an unpredictable turn of events.

I thought the ending was perfect and horrifying. It could have ended in no other way, and yet, if I were writing this novel, I don't think I would have had the guts to do what Flynn did.

This was an enjoyable, unpredictable, addictive read. I would enjoy rereading it.

[Kara]

Hahahaha! I 100% totally agree with your first paragraph. (view spoiler)[I totally identified most with Amy (even after it was revealed that she was completely sociopthic), and it is TERRIFYING my boyfriend (he read it too). (hide spoiler)]

[Carrie]

Ha! My husband is also slightly terrified, but knows I'm way too lazy to pull an Amy on him!

[Carrie]

Read 9/23/12 **

To be fair, I didn't completely read this. I read through page 213, and quit. I think this book would be great for someone very new to reading critically. But, it was too basic for my taste.

One positive of the book: I got a lot of great reading recommendations.

[Carrie]

Read 9/26/12 ***

I thought this was a really cute book. If you're a fan of music, and musical history, I think you'd really enjoy this book. I thought Doyle did a great job of creating likable characters, and a realistic ride for a garage band. I also liked his descriptions of the band playing various songs. I'm a big soul music fan, so I could definitely hear the songs in my head, right along with the Commitments' playing, but I think even if you didn't know the actual songs, you'd still enjoy those scenes.

I gave it a three star rating, because some of the characters felt a little flat, and I think the story could have been longer and more developed. But, for what it is (a very short story of a specific experience), it was fun and enjoyable.

[Carrie]

Note: I read the following stories via audiobook. They were all grouped together in the same audiobook, but I did individual reviews for each short story.


Read 9/28/12 ****

This was the first of the Sherlock Holmes mysteries I read. I liked that the puzzle sort of snuck up on me. The details were all laid out to Holmes, and it seemed pretty obvious what happened. Once Holmes and Watson went out to the house to investigate further, I was surprised at the turn of events. It was a quickly told story, but I did enjoy the introduction of the Holmes and Watson characters, as well as the style of Doyle's writing.

On a side note, I listened to this on audio vs. actually having read this book. I've tried to read Sherlock Holmes before, but always got distracted because of the writing style. I'm glad I made the choice to listen to it, because it forced me to continue, and it ultimately caught my full attention.
flag


Read 10/1/12 ***

I didn't care much for this story. It possibly was because of the reader (this was another audio book for me), as I found him difficult to understand. If I had been reading this book, I may have done better with the dialect. Beyond that, I thought the mystery was very obvious. While we rely upon Holmes' clients to often do stupid or ill-advised things in order to create or contribute to their plights, the clerk in this case was very very dumb. Lesson here: if it seems too good to be true - it is.



Read 10/2/12 *****

This, so far, has been my favorite of the Sherlock Holmes mysteries. I loved the Miss Hunter character. She was a capable woman, unlike many of the others I've noticed in the short stories, and I liked that Holmes appreciated that about her. Of course, she was dumb enough to enter into a pretty shady situation, but then again, what Sherlock Holmes character doesn't do that? Otherwise, I guess there'd be no mysteries. Doyle did a great job of creating suspense and terror in just a few short pages, and I found myself sitting in my car before work listening to the conclusion before I could go on with the day. I also liked that we started to see more of Holmes', and especially Watson's personalities in this story. I'm looking forward to our next adventure!


Read 10/4/12 ***

** spoiler alert ** So, if I've learned anything from Sherlock Holmes, it's if someone offers you a job wherein you would be grossly underpaid or overpaid, it's probably a scam. In this case, both the underpaid and overpaid scenarios took place. I think if I hadn't just recently read the Stockbroker's Clerk story, I may have liked this one a bit better. But,it was very obvious from the beginning that the Red-Headed League was a scam, and there had to be some reason why it was incepted. I did think Doyle was a bit funnier in this story than in others, and Holmes continues to be more and more developed in my mind as a character, as does Watson. But, as far as suspense goes, this one wasn't my favorite.

Overall - When I reflect on this collection as a whole, two main themes emerge: 1) Men who rely upon women for their income are likely to harm them and 2) If someone offers you a simple job for a lot of money, they're probably robbing a bank. I'm looking forward to reading more of Sherlock Holmes, and am hopeful that we can move away from these two themes and explore something else.

[Nathan]

I'm reading A Study in Scarlet right now. How funny! My brother is on a huge Sherlock Holmes kick at the moment, and wants to get me into him. It's a surprisingly easy read so far.
Have you seen the BBC tv series Sherlock? It's very good and apparently quite close to the stories.

[Carrie]

Trevor wrote: "I'm reading A Study in Scarlet right now. How funny! My brother is on a huge Sherlock Holmes kick at the moment, and wants to get me into him. It's a surprisingly easy read so far.
Have you seen th..."


I agree that it's very easy to read. (Although, I did listen to these stories, but they definitely kept my interest the whole time.)

I haven't seen the series, but I may check it out. We don't have cable, but I think I'll see if I can find it on Netflix. I saw the movie with Robert Downey Jr., but I can't say I was a big fan. Did you see that?

[Nathan]

No I never saw that, actually. I never had an interest in it when it came out. I'm not a Downey Jr. fan, so I can't say that it appeals to me! haha

[Carrie]

Trevor wrote: "No I never saw that, actually. I never had an interest in it when it came out. I'm not a Downey Jr. fan, so I can't say that it appeals to me! haha"

I used to have a big crush on Robert Downey Jr. when I was a teenager. I'm still kind of a sucker for him. But, even he didn't save that movie for me . . .

[Carrie]

Read 10/27/12 ***

I thought the beginning was very slow. The story eventually ended up being one that I enjoyed quite a bit, but it took the author a long time to get me hooked. I'd say at least the first half of the book was a bit of a struggle. I don't know that I'd recommend the book to anyone, and I definitely wouldn't read it again, but I did end up enjoying it once I became invested in the characters.

[Carrie]

Read 10/30/12 *****

This book has quickly become one of my favorite books of all time. I almost wanted to flip it back to page one and start re-reading as soon as I finished it, although I think I'll give it some time to sink in. I loved the illustration of the damage that can be done to society by becoming homogenized, sterile, and efficient. It reminds me, very tangentially, of what is happening to music today. As we "perfect" things with auto-tune and electronic instruments, we remove all emotion and individuality, and with that goes the passion.

Some of my favorite quotes:

"But I don't want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin."

"I like being myself. Myself and nasty. Not somebody else, however jolly."

"Ironically enough, the only people who can hold up indefinitely under the stress of modern war are psychotics. Individual insanity is immune to the consequences of collective insanity."

[Carrie]

Read 11/4/12 ****

This book was a very entertaining read, for a "business book." Sometimes, I find this genre a little dry to read, but I thought Duhigg did a good job of making the book relevant and relatable. I particularly enjoyed the section on "sticky" music. I thought that was a very applicable lesson. One could take that theory of sandwiching a less "sticky" idea in between two more "sticky" ideas in order to create and encourage a habit in one's employees. I can see an immediate application for that on my team.

I would recommend this book to anyone who manages a team, or to anyone struggling with the ability to routinize and organize their own life.

[Nathan]

Carrie wrote: "
Read 11/4/12 ****

This book was a very entertaining read, for a "business book." Sometimes, I find this genre a l..."

Looks interesting, Carrie! I may have to read that book.

[Carrie]

Trevor wrote: "Carrie wrote: "
Read 11/4/12 ****

This book was a very entertaining read, for a "business book." Sometimes, I find..."

You're not allowed until you read . :-)

[Nathan]

hahaha! I'm reading it in December. :)

[Carrie]

Read 11/12/12 *

I don't know why I read this book. Chelsea Handler isn't funny to me. In general, I'm a sucker for biographies, and funny ones especially, and I needed something new to listen to in my car. And the library was closing, so Chelsea it was. It seems like people either love or hate this book. Put me in the hate column. It didn't make me laugh at all. The opposite, in fact, I felt bad and sad for Chelsea. She seemed like an alcoholic slut. I'm all for women's liberation and sexual freedom, and have nothing against one night stands. In fact, I'm of the opinion that a few good one night stands should be mandatory before marriage, just so you know what you're giving up. But, it didn't seem like she was making a conscious decision to sleep with these men, instead just getting shit-faced and falling into bed with whatever guy met her random criteria for the night. Then she proceeds to make fun of the guy, and talk about what a loser he was, ignoring the irony that she was sleeping with this loser, making her an even bigger loser. Anyway, I could have forgiven that, I guess, if she just would have been funny. Even once. But she wasn't.