The story of how two friends plan to see the world in a week, well, not the entire world, only the "relevant" (to them) parts. Their adventures are full of the plans and dreams they made when they were kids, and now they want to run from their ordinary lives and make them happen.
It was a tragic year for them. Their friend, Jack, died in a car accident and they seem lost without the only good piece in their trio. Will got beaten by some guys, because they had mistaken them for Hand(who in a way was guilty of something). Will got an astounding amount of money for some picture with him changing a light bolt, and now he felt like giving them all away in an impulse of catharsis. He convinces Hand to take a leave from work and to travel with him for a week.
They go to Senegal, and then Morocco, London and Estonia and New York and then Will finishes his journey to a wedding in Mexico City. They start in Senegal where they have different plans on how and to whom they should give money, the same in Morocco and other places where they venture. They seem to be drawn in adventures where they are at the edge of death and living, and come triumphant. This gives them the feeling that they could accomplish anything. But Will cannot forgive his friend Hand for leaving them to get the beating and in the end of the journey he realizes that the only friend that wouldn't have let him alone has Jack, but that Jack is dead and he couldn't do anything to save him, or to avenge his death. He only tries to live with a disfigured face and to come on top of his depressing thoughts. In the end he does seem to realize the things important to him and how he would like to be, but like a complete circle of events, this epiphany is the mark of an approaching death. He dies, two months after attending his friend wedding in Mexico.
The journey, the monologues that Will has, the way that Hand seems to take life as a big joke, are only aspects of different approaches to what seems important in this life. Money do make a difference, the characters know and feel that, but the friendship they had also made a difference. Unfortunately their friendship cannot be the same as a part of what made it special is gone(Jack their friend was the rational part, the one that seem to take confort in the little things). Sometimes, friendships can be ruined by the lack of understanding of the perspectives that the people in it have. Every person has different approaches to life, to important things and sometimes is easy to mistake them for being irrelevant, and then hurt each other.
Maybe all friends should have a journey during which they could make a clear stance on what the important things are to them, but it might seem hard and sometimes unattainable.
vineri, 17 decembrie 2010
The Mummy at the dinning room table
This book is excellent for those thinking about a career as a psychologist, counselor or for those which want to know that sometimes people behave in different and unexpected ways because they weren't taught otherwise or the conditions were extreme.
Jeffrey Kottler and Jon Carlson, two of the most prolific therapist started to gather the most unusual cases that great therapists had during their practice. The most memorable, the most challenging for themselves are included in this book. It's a though reading sometimes, because you are put directly in contact with someone else's pain and you must read it with your mind open and judgement free attitude.
I enjoyed reading it and it gave me a deeper understanding of the techniques and methods taught during my masters years, and now I am eager to start my own private practice. The reason for that is that I have come to realize that people are much more engaged in the therapeutic process when they start by giving money/paying for the help they want rather than receiving that help in a public setting, where it is free, and only those who are really committed or know the value of the service can make the change last. I see it in my school office, where I am responsible of speech therapy, and sadly the parents rarely come to make sure that their chid is making progress or how to make the therapy more productive by doing a "homework" at home with their child.
The book is filled with examples of the human power to make changes in their life/environment and by doing this to achieve the goal of happiness or at least the goal of being able to live your life in a peaceful manner. All the therapist had different approaches to their patients problems, but the line that connected all their efforts was that of respect for the power of their patient /client to make a change and their attitude of acceptance towards the person in front of them. That is an attitude we can rarely enjoy from strangers, only the close ones can really accept for what we are and to keep in mind that we have the power to change and to make our dreams/plans come true(though it is a great burden sometimes for our closest not to judge us or to give solutions that they think are helpful for us).
Jeffrey Kottler and Jon Carlson, two of the most prolific therapist started to gather the most unusual cases that great therapists had during their practice. The most memorable, the most challenging for themselves are included in this book. It's a though reading sometimes, because you are put directly in contact with someone else's pain and you must read it with your mind open and judgement free attitude.
I enjoyed reading it and it gave me a deeper understanding of the techniques and methods taught during my masters years, and now I am eager to start my own private practice. The reason for that is that I have come to realize that people are much more engaged in the therapeutic process when they start by giving money/paying for the help they want rather than receiving that help in a public setting, where it is free, and only those who are really committed or know the value of the service can make the change last. I see it in my school office, where I am responsible of speech therapy, and sadly the parents rarely come to make sure that their chid is making progress or how to make the therapy more productive by doing a "homework" at home with their child.
The book is filled with examples of the human power to make changes in their life/environment and by doing this to achieve the goal of happiness or at least the goal of being able to live your life in a peaceful manner. All the therapist had different approaches to their patients problems, but the line that connected all their efforts was that of respect for the power of their patient /client to make a change and their attitude of acceptance towards the person in front of them. That is an attitude we can rarely enjoy from strangers, only the close ones can really accept for what we are and to keep in mind that we have the power to change and to make our dreams/plans come true(though it is a great burden sometimes for our closest not to judge us or to give solutions that they think are helpful for us).
miercuri, 8 decembrie 2010
Procesul/ The Trial
I’ve heard about this novel, and finally I got the time and was intrigued enough to read it. I must confess, it is a bit confusing at parts, but the overall confusion sticks to it like fruit flies to apples.
When I read the name of the main character Josef K. I immediately thought it is going to be a novel in which I could feel an autobiographical account, but it might be just my imagination that has led me to think that. Anyway, as I read it I started to see the character as having a weird shizoidal attitude to all of people around him. He is being accused or even going through a trial without knowing the crime of which he is being accused of. Here is where I sense the metaphors kick in. To justify myself: first-the jury and all the judicial system is working in areas and locations viewed by the people in that time as expressing lack of financial resources (the offices are situated in attics); second – he never sees any judge and all the hearings are done without mentioning of the crime, and without possibility to defend or justify anything; and third- K. himself goes through different stages regarding the trial itself(ignoring it, and then trying desperately to find out how the system works and then to create a defense against the crime accused of).
All this point me to the idea that maybe the trial was something that the character has imposed itself upon, like something subjective that he accused himself of and then trying to convince himself that is being accused and trialed, but he is the judge and he is the one accused. The fact that he renounces to seek help from outsiders (lawyers, family members, friends) and he renounces slowly to all thoughts of an advancing career leads to the end of the trial and the serving of the punishment. He is the one that gives him that punishment, and although he is being executed by two men, in reality it seems more like a suicidal action, one that he has planned as a consequence of his imaginary trial.
This view is the one that makes sense the most, and for me it is the key to understanding this tangled novel.
When I read the name of the main character Josef K. I immediately thought it is going to be a novel in which I could feel an autobiographical account, but it might be just my imagination that has led me to think that. Anyway, as I read it I started to see the character as having a weird shizoidal attitude to all of people around him. He is being accused or even going through a trial without knowing the crime of which he is being accused of. Here is where I sense the metaphors kick in. To justify myself: first-the jury and all the judicial system is working in areas and locations viewed by the people in that time as expressing lack of financial resources (the offices are situated in attics); second – he never sees any judge and all the hearings are done without mentioning of the crime, and without possibility to defend or justify anything; and third- K. himself goes through different stages regarding the trial itself(ignoring it, and then trying desperately to find out how the system works and then to create a defense against the crime accused of).
All this point me to the idea that maybe the trial was something that the character has imposed itself upon, like something subjective that he accused himself of and then trying to convince himself that is being accused and trialed, but he is the judge and he is the one accused. The fact that he renounces to seek help from outsiders (lawyers, family members, friends) and he renounces slowly to all thoughts of an advancing career leads to the end of the trial and the serving of the punishment. He is the one that gives him that punishment, and although he is being executed by two men, in reality it seems more like a suicidal action, one that he has planned as a consequence of his imaginary trial.
This view is the one that makes sense the most, and for me it is the key to understanding this tangled novel.
duminică, 28 noiembrie 2010
Generation X: Tales for an accelerated culture
Andy, Claire and Dag are three friends chosen to be the exponents for their generation. Maybe they aren’t everyone’s prototype of a young generation that used to be between 20 and 30 about two decades ago. The book was written in 1991 and it’s composed of a series of stories that these three friends tell to each other in their quest for an existence which could offer a perfect balance between their needs (mostly to discover what they want to do with their life) and a convenient way of living.
They choose to work and live in a region of Florida, Palm Springs, where they feel free to judge others for their life choices. Of course, the author presents them with a perfect human need to accomplish something of their life, but in the end they do manage to evade falling in the category that they genuinely despise: that of the yuppies. I mean, they evade to a different world only to be sure that they can forever evade their need for a secure job, a house and a family that could fall into the prototype of some realization, and they seem to think that their evasion might just help them achieve that (I think it’s a great solution to their existential problem).
Some critics consider the book to be written in a way that resembles The Decameron and I can certainly see the resemblance there, but, to me it seemed more like the life story that these characters where creating in order to voyage to a different stage of self realization. Maybe it’s just a way of clearing the past and emerging ones true values in life and the beliefs by which that persons stands but it seemed a lot more plausible than to think that they were telling stories just to cushion themselves from the outside world.
I like the way that the three characters choose to stick to some values, even though I might not entirely agree to all of them.
I enjoyed the book and felt that I might begin to understand other people, but it might well be just an illusion given be the writing style. Anyway, I can hardly wait to read a book about my generation, which some call Generation Y(although X sounded better and had an feminist appeal – chromosome X).
They choose to work and live in a region of Florida, Palm Springs, where they feel free to judge others for their life choices. Of course, the author presents them with a perfect human need to accomplish something of their life, but in the end they do manage to evade falling in the category that they genuinely despise: that of the yuppies. I mean, they evade to a different world only to be sure that they can forever evade their need for a secure job, a house and a family that could fall into the prototype of some realization, and they seem to think that their evasion might just help them achieve that (I think it’s a great solution to their existential problem).
Some critics consider the book to be written in a way that resembles The Decameron and I can certainly see the resemblance there, but, to me it seemed more like the life story that these characters where creating in order to voyage to a different stage of self realization. Maybe it’s just a way of clearing the past and emerging ones true values in life and the beliefs by which that persons stands but it seemed a lot more plausible than to think that they were telling stories just to cushion themselves from the outside world.
I like the way that the three characters choose to stick to some values, even though I might not entirely agree to all of them.
I enjoyed the book and felt that I might begin to understand other people, but it might well be just an illusion given be the writing style. Anyway, I can hardly wait to read a book about my generation, which some call Generation Y(although X sounded better and had an feminist appeal – chromosome X).
joi, 25 noiembrie 2010
All families are psychotic
To those of you thinking that I could read so fast a book, you're wrong, the first book(The Inflationary Universe) had to be reviewed almost a week ago, but I kept postponing it due to all sorts of factors. Even this book had to be reviewed yesterday, but I’m doing it just now.
So about the book: It’s great! Although at some points it seemed far fetched, I mean the adventures of the Drummond family seemed to be put at random, like creating a puzzle, but it was a nice style kept throughout the whole book, so I think it was a brilliant idea from the author. I enjoyed the fact that the characters were so typical and so sincerely described by the author, that I almost felt like I knew the persons, like I could have been, under the circumstances one of the family. This, to my opinion, is what made the book great. I’ve heard about it and finally read it to make my mind about it.
I hope to get to the honest way of telling my mind without a “veil” (the one we sometimes put when we don’t want others to know that some of the things we say are really cardinal to us, and the way in which they could react might alter our relationship with them).
It really felt like a picture of a family, a cute, puzzle –like family and the fact that they accepted each others faults and differences made the novel seem like a good thing to start a conversation around family dinners or around the holidays.
The events seem to succeed at a speed that can certainly make you want something more in your life, a kind of adventure movie. But I guess all lives are in their one pace, and sometimes moments can seem very full and excited, even if as a whole life seems to have an almost uniform feel. When those moments arrive I think that it might be best just to enjoy them and to be sincere with us about our reactions and feeling to them.
So about the book: It’s great! Although at some points it seemed far fetched, I mean the adventures of the Drummond family seemed to be put at random, like creating a puzzle, but it was a nice style kept throughout the whole book, so I think it was a brilliant idea from the author. I enjoyed the fact that the characters were so typical and so sincerely described by the author, that I almost felt like I knew the persons, like I could have been, under the circumstances one of the family. This, to my opinion, is what made the book great. I’ve heard about it and finally read it to make my mind about it.
I hope to get to the honest way of telling my mind without a “veil” (the one we sometimes put when we don’t want others to know that some of the things we say are really cardinal to us, and the way in which they could react might alter our relationship with them).
It really felt like a picture of a family, a cute, puzzle –like family and the fact that they accepted each others faults and differences made the novel seem like a good thing to start a conversation around family dinners or around the holidays.
The events seem to succeed at a speed that can certainly make you want something more in your life, a kind of adventure movie. But I guess all lives are in their one pace, and sometimes moments can seem very full and excited, even if as a whole life seems to have an almost uniform feel. When those moments arrive I think that it might be best just to enjoy them and to be sincere with us about our reactions and feeling to them.
The Inflationary Universe
Alan Guth's story of how a community of scientists is working a problem so complex as to know what happened at <1 second after the universe appeared is astonishing.
I always thought that it takes a lot of determination, patience and perseverance to tackle big questions and reading this account of how the theory on an inflating universe appeared, only validated my assumptions. The remarkable thing, alongside with the explanation for the universe, was the fact that a community of physicists were so actively involved in disseminating the knowledge, and in trying to think of explanations for how things appeared to be. Only in a community which solves a "puzzle problem"(main characteristic of a puzzle type problem is that a big number of scientists are involved in solving it) could the spreading of ideas be so fast. Another important characteristic is the fact that the culture was ready to accommodate with a new theory for explaining the universe. This, I come to think, after reflecting at big discoveries, is an important factor which contributes to the general public's acceptance of an explanatory theory.
To make the most of what I understood of the inflationary theory, or the new inflationary theory, I'll try to summarize it in a few words: At a point in which matter was in quasiequilibrium state(false vacuum) the energy density was so big and yet the matter acted in a stable form until some nonuniformities appeared, which set the motion of the inflation. An inflaton field was created so quickly near a false vacuum bubble, that once some energy got separated it went on to expand at a rate of unimaginable speed. Due to the nonuniformities, it appears that the universe is expanding but the speed with which it is doing this is mostly constant, but slowing. The data in cosmic radiation support this slowing of the expansion. Of course the numbers are so big, that even to try to imagine the zero's was a huge task, but I understood something about the physics and its laws, and my curiosity grew bigger.
I mean to find out that there are many universes, and that the one in which we live is a pocket of universe, and even our observable universe is a speck in the universe in which we reside, not to say that the Milky Way is just a galaxy amongst other galaxies, not even at the center of the universe (this pocket universe). And to think that our sun is just a medium size star in a galaxy at the outskirts of the Milky Way, and that our planet is inhabited by more than six billion people, it really makes you think about the uniqueness of each other. And coming to speak about humans, which have a tiny amount of time on this planet, and in this solar system, and in this galaxy, and in this universe, it really sets me to think that maybe the only “durable” change, and the most impact I’ll ever have is on my life and the people around me so I have to really make the change count, don’t I?
So in my on small, peculiar “universe life” I’ll try to make good things inflate and dwell on a bigger space, try to accommodate the potential “black holes”(for the purpose of accommodating psychology I’ll call them irrational belief), maybe revert them into “white holes”(rational coping mechanisms), and hope that I will have more “matter”(realistic optimism and confidence in setting goals) than “antimatter”(things to annihilate my optimism).
I still hope to see some new news on the universe and the cosmos, because now, after finishing high school, when I gave a last shoot into understanding physics, I’m ready to understand more about everything, and know that my quest to knowledge will take me further.
I always thought that it takes a lot of determination, patience and perseverance to tackle big questions and reading this account of how the theory on an inflating universe appeared, only validated my assumptions. The remarkable thing, alongside with the explanation for the universe, was the fact that a community of physicists were so actively involved in disseminating the knowledge, and in trying to think of explanations for how things appeared to be. Only in a community which solves a "puzzle problem"(main characteristic of a puzzle type problem is that a big number of scientists are involved in solving it) could the spreading of ideas be so fast. Another important characteristic is the fact that the culture was ready to accommodate with a new theory for explaining the universe. This, I come to think, after reflecting at big discoveries, is an important factor which contributes to the general public's acceptance of an explanatory theory.
To make the most of what I understood of the inflationary theory, or the new inflationary theory, I'll try to summarize it in a few words: At a point in which matter was in quasiequilibrium state(false vacuum) the energy density was so big and yet the matter acted in a stable form until some nonuniformities appeared, which set the motion of the inflation. An inflaton field was created so quickly near a false vacuum bubble, that once some energy got separated it went on to expand at a rate of unimaginable speed. Due to the nonuniformities, it appears that the universe is expanding but the speed with which it is doing this is mostly constant, but slowing. The data in cosmic radiation support this slowing of the expansion. Of course the numbers are so big, that even to try to imagine the zero's was a huge task, but I understood something about the physics and its laws, and my curiosity grew bigger.
I mean to find out that there are many universes, and that the one in which we live is a pocket of universe, and even our observable universe is a speck in the universe in which we reside, not to say that the Milky Way is just a galaxy amongst other galaxies, not even at the center of the universe (this pocket universe). And to think that our sun is just a medium size star in a galaxy at the outskirts of the Milky Way, and that our planet is inhabited by more than six billion people, it really makes you think about the uniqueness of each other. And coming to speak about humans, which have a tiny amount of time on this planet, and in this solar system, and in this galaxy, and in this universe, it really sets me to think that maybe the only “durable” change, and the most impact I’ll ever have is on my life and the people around me so I have to really make the change count, don’t I?
So in my on small, peculiar “universe life” I’ll try to make good things inflate and dwell on a bigger space, try to accommodate the potential “black holes”(for the purpose of accommodating psychology I’ll call them irrational belief), maybe revert them into “white holes”(rational coping mechanisms), and hope that I will have more “matter”(realistic optimism and confidence in setting goals) than “antimatter”(things to annihilate my optimism).
I still hope to see some new news on the universe and the cosmos, because now, after finishing high school, when I gave a last shoot into understanding physics, I’m ready to understand more about everything, and know that my quest to knowledge will take me further.
vineri, 12 noiembrie 2010
"Marele singuratic"
Marin Preda's style is unique in a way that manages to comprise both the rural world at the beginning of the 20th century and the new modern world- seen in fast developing Romanian cities. The novel, which would mean "The Great Solitarian" is the story of a young man trying to construct a life after he has been rejected from his political activity in the communist party. It tell the story of Niculae Moromete, the son of Ilie Moromete the main character in Morometii. It actually is an account for the years spent by Niculae Moromete from his childhood in Morometii volume 1 and Morometii volume 2. We see Niculae as a grown man, working at the royal castle, taking care of the garden(a gardener on the course of taking his final exams to become an horticulture engineer).
Niculae is portrayed as an egocentric individual which sees his seclusion from the outside world as a form of clarifying his view of the world around him. Of course solitude cannot teach about how you could prescribe a great life for yourself or others, and he is trapped in the course of his life events, falls in love with an painter and finally after she dies he resumes his desire to create a new religion for all men.
He finds out, in the course of the book that sometimes people are unpredictable and can do unexpected things just out of sheer fear of not wanting something bad to happen to them(the case of the murder done by Pecingine Ioan). The author tries to put a mini crime story in a Dostoievskian style, but to me it seems to much polished, like he has put to much effort in it, and by doing that he lost some expression of the facts, only to gain some small clarification on the mobile of the crime.
The novel is a complex one, combining different narrative styles, the one in which the characters present their thought and the one in which the author is only the observer in presenting the facts. Its a different novel, and maybe the others will manage to achieve a greater deepness in one perspective. I think that this might be what I seemed to miss from the book: a complete deepness of the facts.
But, because this comment is posted after two days have passed since I finished it, I can realize now that maybe this is the new style in which the author wanted to present the facts. In a manner which might resemble most to an extensive reportage on the brief sequence of two years in the lifetime of a person. If my hunch is correct that these technique might be fruitful, but nonetheless it seems to leave me with a sense of wonder, like something is missing from the book, like the author created something at a time and then decided not to speak about it for the rest of the book. Maybe it's just me..
Anyway, it's an interesting account of how one can lose sight of the important things which gave him/her a purpose to grow/create, and then after some unfortunate events he/she can return to a new state of considering things. After all, in the end Niculae did went back to be a political activist, but now he had his diploma as an engineer in horticulture.
Niculae is portrayed as an egocentric individual which sees his seclusion from the outside world as a form of clarifying his view of the world around him. Of course solitude cannot teach about how you could prescribe a great life for yourself or others, and he is trapped in the course of his life events, falls in love with an painter and finally after she dies he resumes his desire to create a new religion for all men.
He finds out, in the course of the book that sometimes people are unpredictable and can do unexpected things just out of sheer fear of not wanting something bad to happen to them(the case of the murder done by Pecingine Ioan). The author tries to put a mini crime story in a Dostoievskian style, but to me it seems to much polished, like he has put to much effort in it, and by doing that he lost some expression of the facts, only to gain some small clarification on the mobile of the crime.
The novel is a complex one, combining different narrative styles, the one in which the characters present their thought and the one in which the author is only the observer in presenting the facts. Its a different novel, and maybe the others will manage to achieve a greater deepness in one perspective. I think that this might be what I seemed to miss from the book: a complete deepness of the facts.
But, because this comment is posted after two days have passed since I finished it, I can realize now that maybe this is the new style in which the author wanted to present the facts. In a manner which might resemble most to an extensive reportage on the brief sequence of two years in the lifetime of a person. If my hunch is correct that these technique might be fruitful, but nonetheless it seems to leave me with a sense of wonder, like something is missing from the book, like the author created something at a time and then decided not to speak about it for the rest of the book. Maybe it's just me..
Anyway, it's an interesting account of how one can lose sight of the important things which gave him/her a purpose to grow/create, and then after some unfortunate events he/she can return to a new state of considering things. After all, in the end Niculae did went back to be a political activist, but now he had his diploma as an engineer in horticulture.
Abonați-vă la:
Postări (Atom)