Lifespan: Why we Age – and Why We Don’t Have To by David A. Sinclair – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘In this paradigm-shifting book from acclaimed Harvard Medical School doctor and one of TIME magazine’s 100 most influential people on earth, Dr. David Sinclair reveals that everything we think we know about ageing is wrong, and shares the surprising, scientifically-proven methods that can help readers live younger, longer.

For decades, the medical community has looked to a variety of reasons for why we age, and the consensus is that no one dies of old age; they die of age-related diseases. That's because ageing is not a disease – it is inevitable.

But what if everything you think you know about ageing is wrong?

What if ageing is a disease? And that disease is curable.’

This is a book where the biologist for the Harvard Medical School, David A. Sinclair builds the case as to why ageing is not a natural phenomenon but a ‘disease’. The book is split into three parts, with a foreword from the author explaining the painful loss of his grandmother before moving on to the technical aspects of the subject.

The first part deals with what we know (the past) – and it is explanation of what is DNA, what are its components, and what are the damages it incurs during the course of our existence (and could it be fixed?). This was the most technical part of the book and while I understood the crux of it, I do not have the technical competence to fully understand all of it – if you have a background in the subject, you may read those paragraphs in detail. However, I appreciate the author for placing his best efforts to simplify – it was interesting how he wrote single paragraph science fictions during the book to simplify what was ageing and why it was a disease.

The next part is about the present and the research that is ongoing and in particular, his research. He discusses some simple lifestyle changes that could be incorporated to live longer – such as fasting. Many of it was a repetition of his assertion that ageing is a disease, that nobody dies peacefully and that every death is very painful. I found it interesting when he mentioned that the term ‘died of old age’ is used so often in common parlance though that is no medical term – and people die because of failure of some organ, which means all it needs to be done to live longer is to address these problems.

The final part is the author discussing the future – 80 is the current normal for a human being at present. Though immortality is not the author’s immediate proposition, he does assert that for millennials and the generations that follow, living up to 120 may not be rare and explains why this is scientifically possible – that there is no natural age limit for the human body. Much as the author is convinced of the premise, he does not ignore the economic and social problems that this change could bring – should people spend a longer part of their life studying? Should people have to prepare for a second career at the age of 60? What about the impact it would create on societal progress? It was never a case in history that a majority of people who were blocking progress – such as those opposed to women’s rights in the 19^th century, opposed to civil rights in the 20^th century, etc. suddenly changed their opinion after passing of a law, but that they were eventually replaced by the subsequent generations who did not hold their views.  

I appreciated two aspects in this work of the author – despite the subject being highly technical, the author tried his best to simplify for the sake of the readers. At this point I need to mention that there is a co-author, the journalist Matthew D. LaPlante and a lot of the efforts at simplification could have been his inputs. This was unlike the book that I read from Edward O Wilson on Diversity of Life (who was incidentally quoted in this book) – which felt like reading a textbook. The author unlike a lot of scientists, was highly appreciative of his team and till date, I have not read a longer list of names in the acknowledgements section of a book.

This book made me think – about what the increased lifespan could cause – especially what the author presents – one where you not only live longer but also healthier. Considering the progress that we have made in this field over the years, I certainly believe that the author’s prognosis is possible, but it is not a reality that I look forward to. That was another point addressed by the writer that he is an optimist when it comes to the capability of humans whereas his children are a lot more pessimistic about the future, and he does acknowledge that there are a lot of problems which do not have a clear solution at present (e.g., climate change).

There are times I felt that the author was convinced of his own research that he was not willing to consider any cons to his premise. I would have liked it if this book had discussed the scientific reasons on why there could be a problem with the premise. I understand after reading his bio on the internet that his anti-ageing position is controversial among the scientific community. One could also argue about the ethical issues about the nature of some of his experiments – I do not have a clear position on whether scientific progress must be chased at all costs and thus, I was not pricked while reading any of it, but I can imagine why some people might feel uneasy. I did find it rather odd that he analysed the DNA of his daughters to find out that they had a particular gene and if they did not make bad lifestyle choices, they could live till 100 without a problem. However, if one of them did not, how would he have felt with the knowledge that one of them was going to die earlier than the other and not to mention, till the final chapter, I did not know that he has a son, whom he never mentioned – so did he not conduct this analysis or did he not have the particular gene type? I would stop my speculation on this here.

To conclude, I would say that this is a great book providing a new perspective, on a topic that we perhaps do not think much about and the best part is, you do not have to be an expert in the subject to understand the essence of them book (there are sections you might have to skim through). Considering the observations above, I would award the book a rating of eight on ten.

Rating – 8/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

The Fire Next Time by James Baldwin – Book Review

 

Afin de lire mon avis de lecture on français, cliquez ici

Publisher’s write-up:

‘James Baldwin's impassioned plea to 'end the racial nightmare' in America was a bestseller when it appeared in 1963, galvanising a nation and giving voice to the emerging civil rights movement. Told in the form of two intensely personal 'letters', The Fire Next Time is at once a powerful evocation of Baldwin's early life in Harlem and an excoriating condemnation of the terrible legacy of racial injustice.’

The Fire Next Time is an essay written by the American writer and civil rights activist, James Baldwin. The book comprises two essays, first is a letter written to his teenage nephew – urging him to broaden his outlook and get away from the chains of what the American society has conditioned the black Americans to aspire for (mediocrity and not excellence as he had put it).

The second essay is the majority of the book, where he explores his experience as a black man growing up in the US. The book primarily deals with how the author initially tried to take cover with the help of religion – visiting the local black church and eventually realising the detrimental effect christianity was causing on the black community in the US. The author also describes his meeting with Elijah Muhammad and the Nation of Islam; of which he was soon disillusioned and describes the movement as merely illogical and merely creating a ‘black god’ to counter the ‘white christian god’.

The book is a short but powerful text exploring the life of an average black person during the time and also clearly bringing out the race relations between the segregated communities. He was often critical of the idea of god, the very idea of the US and its ancestors who are dubbed as people who fought for peace and ‘freedom’, the latter being ironic considering how deeply entrenched was the idea of racial superiority; not to mention that slavery was legal not too long ago.

However, I was not in agreement with the author justifying violence; whatever be the reason – and to be fair to him, his arguments were convincing. I must note that he did not directly endorse violence but at the same time, condemned the glorification of the ‘peaceful negro’ as the white people do not want to imagine any threat to their property and wealth.

Another observation which is less to do with the book as such; is that I was uncomfortable with repeatedly seeing the word ‘negro’; I understand that in the 60s that was a word commonly used in formal writing as well, but a footnote from the publisher would have helped to contextualise. I would not be surprised if I quote any line from this book in the future without this context, some white supremacist claiming the word to have legitimacy.

The book was insightful and considering the size of the book, it made us think a lot more about the forms in which discrimination could take place and how from a position of privilege, we can easily brand people as ‘criminals’ whereas in a society that systematically discriminates; there is little incentive to play by the rules. Given the current situation in the United States, with a president (Donald Trump, at the time of writing this review) who refuses to unconditionally condemn white supremacists and kowtows to far right groups, it is important to make people aware of the struggles people have had to come to the situation we have today and that the struggle is far from over.

On that note, I would award the book a rating of eight on ten.

Rating – 8/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

The Maid and the Queen: The Secret History of Joan of Arc by Nancy Goldstone – Book Review

Joan was an illiterate maid from eastern France in the 15^th century. Legend has it that she saved France from English takeover during the Hundred Years War and is one of the figures with most statues around France. But the question remains – how did an illiterate teenager put up such a courageous fight and led the demoralised French forces against all odds (in decisive battles at Orléans, Beaugency, Reims, etc.)? Nancy Goldstone in this book tries to demystify Joan and rationalise the events surrounding her rise.

The first I knew of Joan was when I was a child; while playing Age of Empires II; wherein Joan’s story is one of the campaigns and since then – this history surrounding England and France has always fascinated me. This book does not start with Joan’s origins at Domrémy in eastern France, which was her birthplace, but instead in Aragon (present day Spain). It introduces us to another prominent woman from those times – Yolande of Aragon. The writer builds her case as to how Joan’s whole story was prop used by Yolande for her power grab (coincidentally or otherwise, Joan was from the Duchy of Bar – which was Yolande’s matrilineal place of origin).

To provide a context – the latter phase of the Hundred Years War was effectively a civil war between two factions, the Burgundian faction which had King Charles VI on their side who backed the English king – Henry V’s, claim to the French throne; the other faction known as the Armagnacs – wanted the succession to remain with the Valois family – the King’s son. And what was Yolande’s interest in this? Charles VII, the son of the King was Yolande’s son-in-law.

I would say the book highlights three aspects – the first is to provide us a brief account of the Hundred Years War during the latter phase and in particular – the role of Yolande and her diplomatic skills in bringing various factions together as France was a highly divided country during the time. The second was to demystify the myths surrounding Joan of Arc – while the book certainly portrayed her as heroic – it also emphasised as to how not all on the Armagnac side were in favour / in awe of Joan. The third was also to demonstrate how divided France was and while we might know Henry V’s exploits in the Battle of Agincourt through Shakespeare’s play, he also had the advantage of attacking a country so divided that his victory was not as surprising as dramatisations have portrayed.

I got a good sense of who was Joan of Arc, her motivations, and the legal systems in place in the 15^th century, considering how her trial is one of the most documented events of the era. I also got to know of some interesting anecdotes which I would surely like to read (like the folklore The Romance of Melusine).

My only suspicion is the extent to which the author’s bias has influenced the work. The book has two principal characters – the Maid – Joan of Arc and the Queen – Yolande of Aragon, Queen of Sicily. The book certainly glorifies Yolande a lot, and sometimes I suspected it was far more than her importance in history. Yolande held her court in her castle at Saumur (in the western French region of Pays de la Loire) and after having read the book, I visited Saumur and the castle. The museum in the castle had more mention of René I of Naples than Yolande herself. This was strange as the book was dismissive of René and described him as the incompetent son of Yolande who often needed his mother’s diplomatic skills to bail himself out. Yolande’s name was mentioned in the castle only once and if that is the extent to which her history is savoured in Saumur, I wonder to what extent it remains elsewhere. However, I would also consider that modern French historians are downplaying or ignoring her role during the Hundred Years War.

To conclude, this is one of the most interesting historical accounts that I have read so far, and I would look forward to reading more about the insights I picked up from this book. On that note, I would award the book a rating of eight.

Rating – 8/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

The Satanic Verses by Sir Salman Rushdie – Book Review

Afin de lire mon avis de lecture en français, cliquez ici

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Just before dawn one winter’s morning, a hijacked aeroplane blows apart high above the English Channel and two figures tumble, clutched in an embrace, towards the sea: Gibreel Farishta, India’s legendary movie star, and Saladin Chamcha, the man of a thousand voices.

Washed up, alive, on an English beach, their survival is a miracle. But there is a price to pay. Gibreel and Saladin have been chosen as opponents in the eternal wrestling match between Good and Evil. But chosen by whom? And which is which? And what will be the outcome of their final confrontation?’

The title of the book is known to all, considering the controversy it generated in the late 1980s following its release in the UK. The summary of the events that followed is that a bounty of $1 million was placed on the author’s head by the then Supreme Leader of Iran; and the author had to go into hiding for several years at his residence in the UK. Salman Rushdie is one of my favourite writers regardless of the controversy; of course, I got to know of him because of it considering I was born much after the fatwa from Iran. It took a while to get my hands on this book and it was a book that I searched quite frantically (and wanted to own a physical copy to make a statement).

To introduce the plot; a plane gets hijacked while flying over the English Channel and eventually explodes, presumed to have no survivors. Miraculously, two of the survivors end up in a beach in England, Gibreel Farishta, a popular movie star in India and Saladin Chamcha, a London based radio performer who is blessed with a thousand different voices. But this is where problems begin, while Gibreel reunited with his English girlfriend, he was troubled by hallucinations with a result of him taking up the personality of the archangel Gabriel. Saladin on the other hand, had a troubled past, a present that he is seemingly happy with about to take a turn for the worse. He begins to exhibit personalities of the devil, both in appearance and behaviour. Following a betrayal, Saladin gets arrested for being an ‘illegal immigrant’ as nobody believed his story of survival; and he gets desperate for revenge on those who put him in this state.

The primary theme of this book was one of identity – the two lead characters were of Indian Muslim heritage; with Gibreel known for playing roles in films with religious themes (across all religions) and Saladin craving for moving out of India and completely embracing an English identity. This identity crisis caused problems for them in their relationships, and in Saladin’s case – a lack of acceptance in both India and UK, making him quite the interesting character in the book.

There were also underlying political themes – some of Gibreel’s hallucinations were allusions to then political events, being the Islamic Revolution in Iran (incidentally, there was a fatwa issued later by the very person whom he alluded to). All of the hallucinations were accompanied by Rushdie’s usual writing style and much as it seems a contradiction in terms, ‘subtle yet direct’ – that is, those who are used to reading his works know exactly what he is referring to in each of these events.

The other hallucinations of Gibreel included were on religion and what blind faith does to people. There was a story of an Indian village where a woman with a serious ailment with nothing to lose makes the enter village follow her to a dangerous pilgrimage (of course, the others had everything to lose). The hallucinations also covered how religion was used by those in power only to further their political or business interests.

Considering the complexity of the book, it felt like reading two different books (not entirely disconnected) – one, that is Gibreel’s hallucinations (rather, where he eventually felt they might be revelations) and on the other side, the story in the real world – of Gibreel and Saladin, the one of strained old relationships, stories of love and jealousy and confused identity. The satire involving the cat and mouse chase between evil and good (being Saladin and Gibreel) was well placed and written within the book. If Midnight’s Children was a complex story, this was a plot that I felt was thrice the complexity of his earlier book and is neither a simple read nor a kind of book that lets you give it up after a point.

Rushdie has always admitted to drawing inspiration from Gabriel García Márquez and I saw some parallels to One Hundred Years of Solitude in the book – the political themes (including the conservative – liberal battle), complex family relationships and multiple characters with the same name! There were three characters named Ayesha in this book and I enjoyed each of the characters in their respective parts of the story.

Coming to the controversy as such, I have read several accounts where some have claimed that it was absolutely offensive and others have said there was nothing to take offense to and things were blown out of proportion. In this book, with Rushdie’s subtle yet direct approach, the attack on Islam was apparent and anyone with a broad knowledge of the religion and its practices (which you are likely to have if you have at least one Muslim friend in your circles) would figure out what he is referring to in his allusions. With that said, he never took the name of Islam even though, the name he chose in the made it pitifully obvious – which was a translation of the word from Arabic to English. Thus, I can fully imagine why an even semi-devout Muslim might be offended by this book; but my personal view on this topic has always been that people have rights, the ideologies that they hold do not. And religion is just another ideology and can be criticised like how political ideologies like mocking or making a satire on communism or nationalism. There is every reason why people can feel offended about the book, write bad reviews and urge everyone to boycott the book if the content offends them but the rights stop there; nobody has the right to issue threats or impose bans on a book for mocking an ideology or religion (my opinion differs only if a book / speech urges violent threats against a said group). Much as Rushdie is still alive and writing, unfortunately, many of his translators were not as lucky as he was and that is unfortunate, but I admire Rushdie for not backing down.

To conclude, this was a book where I was overworked in terms of marking interesting paragraphs or quotes for future reading. As aforementioned, this is not a book meant for a binge reading session of eight hours, you are meant to take it slowly and sometimes read it slowly and is probably better enjoyed when read for a second time. I should plan a second reading myself in some time. It was a complex work of fiction but one of the best I have read in recent times, on that note, I would award the book a rating of nine on ten.

Rating – 9/10

Have a nice day,

Andy 

The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins – Book Review

 

Afin de lire cet avis de lecture en français, cliquez ici

Publisher’s write-up:

‘In the ruins of a place once known as North America lies the nation of Panem, a shining Capitol surrounded by twelve outlying districts. The Capitol is harsh and cruel and keeps the districts in line by forcing them all to send one boy and once girl between the ages of twelve and eighteen to participate in the annual Hunger Games, a fight to the death on live TV.

Sixteen-year-old Katniss Everdeen regards it as a death sentence when she steps forward to take her sister's place in the Games. But Katniss has been close to dead before—and survival, for her, is second nature. Without really meaning to, she becomes a contender. But if she is to win, she will have to start making choices that weight survival against humanity and life against love.’

The Hunger Games is the first book of the Hunger Games universe. It is based in a dystopian setting in the fictitious country of Panem which comprises 12 districts, which resembles the United States there is no reference to it.

The Capitol is a rich metropolis that exercises political control over all the districts and exploits their resources and people. The Capitol organises an annual hunger games event – where 2 teenagers from each district are chosen for a fight to death (similar to gladiatorial games in the Roman Empire). The intention of the event is to remind the districts of their failed rebellion against the Capitol.

District Twelve is a coal mining district and is poor; and in this district lives Katniss Everdeen, who takes responsibility for her ailing mother and young sister; by hunting for food in the forests with her friend Gale. Her life changes forever – when her sister whom she is determined to protect at all costs; is selected as District 12’s tribute for the Hunger Games. This forces Katniss to volunteer herself in place of her sister; while satisfied that she has saved her sister, she has very little hopes of survival in the games.

The very premise of the book was gloomy and darker elements kept being added as the plot developed. Every time when you feel that there cannot be something worse about this world – we are introduced to one – starting from the abject poverty, the suppression, the games; and the fact that the games are a televised even with high viewership. I enjoyed these aspects and could imagine how under imposing circumstances, even in the real world, people are likely to give in (we have had examples in history too) – and this book by itself has allusions to Greek mythology and ancient Roman empire – mixing with the present day reality TV.

While the book started slow, it picks up pace with the start of the Hunger Games where the children from each of the districts start killing each other. However, since I am reading the book now where I know that there are sequels; my thought while turning the pages was ‘how does Katniss survive amidst all this?’ than ‘will Katniss survive?’. Much as it is a universe, the initial few pages had too many characters introduced and even by the end of it only a few characters remained in my mind – the writer has developed the characters of Katniss, her fellow district 12 tribute Peeta and their mentor Haymitch well but other than them, I felt a little overwhelmed by the number of names and the limited significance they had. Katniss in particular – was a rebellious character, till the very end that her refusal to play along the narratives of The Capitol set a good premise for the sequel.

The advantages that the sequel has is that the writer has been very mysterious about this universe – about what was the apocalyptic event or what led to the rebellion against the Capitol in the first place; providing scope for a lot more to be explored in this universe.

To conclude, this book does well in making one’s blood run cold; what is expected of a dystopian novel and sets up an excellent premise for the future novels. The major drawback of this novel other than what has been mentioned earlier is the sheer predictability of the book. I award the book a rating of seven on ten.

Rating – 7/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo – Book Review

Afin de lire mon avis de lecture en français, cliquez ici

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Anger. Fear. Guilt. Denial. Silence. These are the ways in which ordinary white people react when it is pointed out to them that they have done or said something that has - unintentionally - caused racial offence or hurt. After, all, a racist is the worst thing a person can be, right? But these reactions only serve to silence people of colour, who cannot give honest feedback to 'liberal' white people lest they provoke a dangerous emotional reaction.’

With the #BlackLivesMatter protest gaining traction with the recent events of police brutality in the US – the murder of George Floyd; it seemed appropriate to read about discrimination and racism to keep oneself better informed. The book is from a US perspective but the concept the author discusses can be applied anywhere as no part of the world is free from discrimination (some more than others).

The crux of the book is her establishment of the concept called white fragility – wherein, white people become defensive when confronted about potential privileges they have had or the racism that prevails in the society and even casual racist behaviour from them (intentional or not is a different debate). She discusses the discrimination people face institutionally and at the level of society. The book also aims at dispelling myths such as white supremacy need not emanate only from members of the ku klux klan but is ingrained in the society. Individualism – a basic tenet of the western society has ensured that it is very difficult to discuss discriminatory behaviour collectively considering the binaries established and people seeing themselves only as individuals – which in effect makes white fragility a very effective defence mechanism.

The book brings into light so many facts and behaviours exhibited by people. Someone people might react with awe, some with shock and a few might even be offended as the book’s underlying premise is that if you are white, there are privileges associated with it and the racism collectively followed has enabled the white person to rise; thereby accusing every person of being part of white supremacist behaviour (replace white with the dominant group in the place you live and it would still work). The prime message of the book is to keep oneself informed of the potential avenues of discrimination a black person might face and urges us to listen to them when they express their hardships rather than dismiss their journey or getting defensive.

One issue many moderates or even progressives might have had with her approach was an excessive finger pointing – if you are white, you are a white supremacist because the society has conditioned you that way. While it is true that the progressive white person whom in their private life is vocal about being anti-racist needs to evaluate their white privilege and acknowledge how consciously or inadvertently they might have been part of the behaviour exhibited by the community as a whole. But it is expected that when a charge so grave is made, the person is likely to be defensive and it defeats the very purpose of the author trying to make people realise the unintentional acts of discrimination that white people indulge in.

Very often, she changed definitions – to me, white supremacy means, to me racism means, etc. I always have an issue with writers changing the meanings of existing words / concepts to build their case. If there is a new definition, express it using new words – white fragility is a welcome example.

Her solution of acknowledging a belonging to the community was not convincing to me; for sure, people must evaluate the situation in the society, the privileges that they have acquired and the benefits that have accrued to an individual by being part of a community despite consciously not adhering to its values. Taking my own example, I come from a privileged community that has had a history of discriminating against the masses and effects continue to this date, but it is not an identity that I am proud of nor is it something that I would like to brandish. I would prefer to stick to individualism while acknowledging my benefits and hardships of others (which I used to refuse when I was in my late teens).

The book is informative, insightful and the urge to understand historical context was explained well (Re: Chapter in the book – White woman’s tears). While this book is specific to US, it can be extrapolated to other parts of the world. On that note, I would award this book a rating of seven on ten.

Rating – 7/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

Trick Mirror by Jia Tolentino – Book Review

Publisher’s write-up:

‘We are living in the era of the self, in an era of malleable truth and widespread personal and political delusion. In these nine interlinked essays, Jia Tolentino, the New Yorker’s brightest young talent, explores her own coming of age in this warped and confusing landscape.

From the rise of the internet to her own appearance on an early reality TV show; from her experiences of ecstasy – both religious and chemical – to her uneasy engagement with our culture’s endless drive towards ‘self-optimisation’; from the phenomenon of the successful American scammer to her generation’s obsession with extravagant weddings, Jia Tolentino writes with style, humour and a fierce clarity about these strangest of times.’

Trick Mirror is a collection of essays from Jia Tolentino, who is currently (May 2020) a staff writer for The New Yorker. The essays are supposed to reflections on self-delusion. The topics covered over the course of the essays are the internet and social media at large, reality shows, stereotypes surrounding women, the economy and the origins of extravagant weddings and the culture in some of the universities in US (racial divides, the rape culture – with particular focus on the university where she studied, University of Virginia).

To add a bit of context to her essays, Tolentino is of Filipino origin and grew up in Texas. The first essay on the internet and the culture that is in the internet today was brought out – about how speech that is no longer considered acceptable in public has now found itself a platform on the internet like the Gamergate scandal. She herself was a former employee for internet-based platforms such as The Hairpin and Jezebel. With that said, this was the only essay that was even remotely interesting.

Talking of the internet, we have the term called ‘clickbaits’ and talking of those, the cover of this book is the ultimate clickbait or pickbait (depending on whichever format of the book you chose – digital or print) ; as the cover gives us a passing impression of talking of self-delusions in general; of course, authors corroborate their assertions with their personal experiences. However, here I was effectively reading a diary or at best, a personal blog of someone with a penchant for writing and has opinions on various topics. There is nothing wrong in either of those, but I would not have put up a misleading title; but of course, Trick Mirror: My opinions on various topics is far less impressive than what she put out.

We often observe that a like or dislike for a non-fiction book is often linked to one’s own positions on the issues. In this case, if any, what I faced was an issue of confirmation bias because from what I could reckon, the author and I are politically aligned on most issues. The book contained a several discrete topics, some talking of scams in general (and not linked to her personally) – but the problem with that was all of which she picked up was so widely covered in the media and also in popular culture – with films and documentaries in Netflix and thus, there was nothing new we were getting out of reading these sections.

Her essay – Pure Heroines, her observation that heroines in fiction needed an element of trauma in the past; I found it to be a common feature across leads in fiction (regardless of whether they were male or female). A common theme in a lot of these stories is how they were coping despite the odds against them and thus, has an element of trauma present (orphaned at a young age, divorce or death of a family member, personal trauma, etc. ). She quoted several books in this chapter and I have good reason to believe that she has not read some of them considering a few references were factually incorrect.

I shall not get deep into where I disagreed with her analysis in the essays because a difference of opinion is to do with an individual and does not impact the value of the book.

My relationship with the book was weird, at no point was I entirely bored and it could often be interesting to read the diary (with consent, of course!) or personal blogs of others. That was not the objective of the book or the projection; her essays were supposed to reflect self-delusions and what I got in exchange was random opinions on various topics.

I extended a benefit of doubt till I read the acknowledgements; that she had probably written these essays at different points of time and compiled all of them into this book. But then, she had disclosed in the acknowledgements section that all the essays were specifically written for this book.

To sum up, for all her talk against toxic capitalism and the internet business models based on user engagement – here is her book, one that merely grabs attention. The essays were disconnected, an expression of personal opinions of issues she feels strongly about (with little connection to the title). I enjoy some of the long reads from The New Yorker, but I have never read one from Tolentino – this book might interest those who know her through her works for the magazine. 

I award the book a rating of two on ten.

Rating – 2/10

Have a nice day,
Andy