I've read most everything Jamison has written and this is my favorite of hers since Empathy Exams. She just has such a gift for holding difficult, conI've read most everything Jamison has written and this is my favorite of hers since Empathy Exams. She just has such a gift for holding difficult, contradictory things up to the light. Some of the patterns in her prose do bother me—when she moves into strings of visceral descriptions, it becomes a little saccharine for me—but overall she has such precise, striking writing and knack for bringing her interior world to the page. Just a really wildly talented and thought-provoking non-fiction writer.
(also lol that I literally spotted her once with her child at the Brooklyn museum and then she talks about being at the bk museum all the time. this city is small!!)...more
harrowing + captivating. it's incredible the ways we will distort ourselves and sometimes quite literally forget who we are in an attempt to secure loharrowing + captivating. it's incredible the ways we will distort ourselves and sometimes quite literally forget who we are in an attempt to secure love.
also Alice is just a remarkably talented writer. ...more
more power to whoever finds beauty + direction from this book, but felt like a whole lot of repetitive, quasi-spiritual mumbo jumbo to me.
was considemore power to whoever finds beauty + direction from this book, but felt like a whole lot of repetitive, quasi-spiritual mumbo jumbo to me.
was considering 2 stars for a few poignant passages, but then landed on 1 star because he felt the need to beat even his good points into the ground....more
I give Edward about a decade till he's working the steps lol.
Jk, sorta.
Anyway, I had much higher expectations for this book. As someone personally aI give Edward about a decade till he's working the steps lol.
Jk, sorta.
Anyway, I had much higher expectations for this book. As someone personally and intellectually interested in substance use, I was hoping for some never-before-considered reasons for why humans persist, even in the face of unthinkable consequences, to want, so badly, to get fucked up. Edward's thesis, essentially, is that because humans are a creative, communal, and cultural species, inebriation has served and continues to serve the purpose of helping us to bond and be more creative.
Ehhh.
Fine. I can buy some of it. I agree, alcohol and drug use can help people bond. There's a shared levity to drinking and drugging that's legitimately hard to replace with other, less-chaotic activities. But a lot of his argument and the evidence to back it up felt intellectually weak and cherry-picked.
Perhaps more importantly, Slingerland seemed wildly out of touch with the behavior of actual drunk people and the unbelievable havoc that drinking and drugging cause. His arguments rely on 400-year-old hymns and poems that espouse the beauty of wine. "See, we've always found it romantic and essential to being human," he seems to say, as he manages to then gloss over the real-life behavior of actual drinkers. He attempts to take off the rose-colored glasses in his final chapter "the dark side of Dionysus," but it feels like an insincere addendum.
For example, a core tenet of Slingerland's argument is that alcohol increases creativity. It helps humans–who occupy a special ecological niche in which we have to figure out ways to manipulate our environment–to achieve so-called lateral thinking and problem solve.
Like, are you joking? Anyone who's listened to their blacked-out friend tell you the same insufferable story 7 different times knows that being drunk makes you stupid. Like, period, end of story. Drunk people are stupid. Maybeee I could buy the argument that the very first drink lowers inhibitions in a way that increases creativity, but sorry you're not going to convince me that alcohol-fueled problem solving is what allowed human to become rulers of the world. He even included the cliche image of people scribbling groundbreaking solutions to problems on pub napkins. Like, based on what evidencee? Sir, I'm nearly positive that a quiet morning walk in nature is far more generative of a brainstorm than whatever inane thing I said to my other drunk friend after 3 cocktails.
Same with alcohol allowing humans to be communal. Lol. Please tell that to anyone who grew up in an alcoholic household. I don't even disagree with the general point that alcohol helps bond people together, but are you just going to gloss over the extraordinary negative consequences to interpersonal relationships that come as a result of drinking. These ECLIPSE the benefits of laughing together with a light buzz. It strikes me as likely that Slingerland has never spent a large amount of time around problem drinkers and has never been immersed in a culture in which heavy drinking is the norm. He waves this away with the idea that "people who are aggressive while drunk were going to be aggressive anyway." That's...literally not the case?
He even says this: "One way that we could expect modest amounts of alcohol to be helpful to couples would be in resolving conflicts or tensions, with the combination of enhanced honesty, focus on the moment, and elevated mood, making it easier to raise and process difficult emotions or deep concerns."
LMAO. Bro, have you ever fought with your partner while drunk? Uh, I'm fairly sure it doesn't help you resolve conflicts more easily. The fact he would even suggest that speaks to him being wildly out of touch with the reality of heavy drinking.
At another point he says that social protocols help curb negative drinking behavior in groups, like the practice of college kids at a party monitoring how many empty bottles are sitting in front of one another so that they can keep each other in check. Have you....ever been to a party? When does this happen? When do college kids look at their buddy and say "ok, hunter, you have 5 empty heinekens in front of you, time to take a little water break." No, they pressure each other to take shots. Everyone's absorbed in their own shit and chasing their own high. It's just, not true.
I think ultimately, the point Slingerland wants to make is this one: Alcohol makes life fun for at least most of us (the ones whose lives haven't been absolutely obliterated by addiction, at least) so let's just harm reduce where we can, appreciate the benefits, and otherwise not be too judgey about it–because nobody's getting out of here alive anyway, alright?
And FINE. That's a fine take. It's honestly about the place I've landed in my own relationship with substances, alcohol included. But his romantized portrait of drinking is so out of touch and so clearly glosses over the real-life havoc that drinking causes–the lives it bulldozes, the potential it squanders–as to render his entire intellectual and academic argument obsolete....more
If you're going to write a book about your remarkable success as a world-famous author, at least let it be inspiring–not just emotionally vacant, selfIf you're going to write a book about your remarkable success as a world-famous author, at least let it be inspiring–not just emotionally vacant, self-aggrandizing anecdotes about times you sold out auditoriums on tour. (Okay, fine, there were a handful of semi-practical tips, too, but honestly I read writing books more for excitement-building than craft advice.)
Side note: The 2003 Salon review of Palahniuk's book "Diary" is one of the most brutal take-downs I've ever read. (Look it up. He actually mentions it in this book and responded to the review at the time via a letter to the editor, in which he invited the critic to "just shut up." LOL.) Of course, she showed more literary and intellectual prowess in under 1,000 words than he does in his entire book–which, I'm sure, is part of the reason why both Palahniuk and his rabid boy-fans came after her so hard....more
Loading...
