Tags
[Thanks to Ruxandra, sonic-maineboom, picklefactory, Taymon, and Emily for getting me books.]
Self-Therapy: A Step By Step Guide To Creating Wholeness And Healing Your Inner Child Using IFS, A New Cutting-Edge Therapy. About halfway through this book I was like “God, that seems familiar” and then I thought to myself “holy shit, it’s magick.” Specifically, the techniques to work with parts in IFS seem very similar to the creation and empowerment of thoughtforms/tulpas. It’s interesting to me that the same techniques seem to have been independently invented, and makes me think it’s more likely that tulpas/thoughtforms/parts are a thing brains naturally create under certain circumstances (although of course that doesn’t mean that creating one is a particularly effective therapy).
I did not complete any of the exercises in this book. A year or so ago, I read that a large number of iatrogenic multiples are borderline, and as soon as I read it I could feel the parts of my brain I’d have to rip up to become a multiple; IFS exercises felt like they were straining those parts. For that reason, I’m curious if IFS has a history of causing multiplicity. I am also somewhat concerned about the fact that all exiles (parts in pain, fear, shame, or trauma) are believed to be a product of a traumatic childhood memory. I feel like that’s a setup for false memories of abusive or merely bad parenting, as well as undue pressure on parents (“if you don’t feed your child on demand then they could grow up to have long-term psychological damage!”).
Getting Things Done. This book thinks I have much more filing to do than I actually have to do. However, I am generally in support of the “make lots of lists” strategy of time management, and am pleased about the new list ideas it has given me. I might swap over to GTD next time I get bored of my current productivity strategy. [ETA a ~month later: I swapped over to GTD and it is in fact delightfully full of lists.]
The Varieties of Scientific Experience. A treat, if only for the question-and-answer section in the back where Sagan explains to a variety of New Agey/liberal theists that it is important to believe only things that you have evidence for and that Einstein’s god was more of a metaphor. Sagan makes the universe feel deeply spiritual. The same resonance which a Christian writer gives to the Incarnation and the Redemption, Sagan gives to the size of the universe and the fragility of life. In a lot of Sagan’s writings, it feels like Sagan was a theologian for a religion that didn’t exist yet; reading a book which is actually about his opinions on religion only makes this feeling more intense. I was continually thinking of Secular Solstice as I read. Very pretty galaxy pictures.
The Ayn Rand Cult. I totally had a lot of grown up thoughts about this book, but they were entirely derailed by the LAST COUPLE PAGES in which the author outs himself as A GODDAMNED MISOGYNIST. In the last few pages, the author writes an alternate universe in which Ayn Rand had a child, which apparently makes her become a well-respected philosopher and author instead of an abusive asshole. Like, seriously? Would you pull this shit about a man? What kind of nineteenth-century dunghole did you dig this “intellectual work is all very well for the ladies as long as they remember their true role as wives and mothers, lest it tax their uterus and turn them into hysterics” shit from?
This book is very reassuring, because people keep accusing Less Wrong of being a cult and yet we don’t do half this shit. I mean, I assume if people were being excommunicated they would have gotten around to me or Topher (cw: basilisk) by now.
Empowerment and Interconnectivity. The author continually feels the need to interrupt a very interesting history of nineteenth-century utilitarian feminists with ramblings about the methodology of feminist history of philosophy. It reminds me a lot of the way that sociology books, by genre convention, must have a chapter where they talk about incorporating Foucault’s theory of blah and Butler’s theory of whatever. Apparently no one can just be interested in feminist utilitarianism or small-town abortion politics, they have to have Greater Meanings and comment on Ongoing Intellectual Discussions. The rest of the book is tremendously interesting, particularly the chapter which argues that Catherine Beecher, the founder of home economics, is actually a feminist utilitarian philosopher. I have a slight grudge against the author for criticizing Mill’s The Subjection Of Women for being written by a privileged man unaware that he isn’t a complete expert on women’s experiences, since this is totally erasing Harriet Taylor Mill’s influence on his philosophy and continuing the erasure of nineteenth-century feminist utilitarian philosophers that this was supposed to correct. I suspect I have fundamental issues with the concept of feminist philosophy, to be honest. I feel like if your metaphysics has a whole lot to say about the subordination of women you’ve probably made a wrong turn somewhere.
Hard Magic. I read this book because a later book in the series was one of the first Sad Puppies candidates for the Hugo, and I felt I ought to have an informed opinion about Mr. Correia’s work. Inevitably, this led me to compare it with John Scalzi’s Redshirts and Bujold’s Vorkosigan Saga, those being the recent Hugo winners I’ve actually read. I really don’t think Redshirts deserved its Hugo– it had a clever premise, but was not exactly well-written– but it deserves a Hugo much, much more than this book. The premise is sort of X-Men Film Noir. The worldbuilding has a couple nice details, particularly in the epigraphs at the beginning of each chapter, but mostly feels like setpieces for fighting to happen during. The villains are lazy, sloppy Yellow Peril cliches. The witty dialogue feels like the sort of dialogue I thought was witty when I was eight years old and pretending to be a superhero. The hero is characterized as smart, yet underestimated because of his gruffness and working-class background, primarily via having all the other characters talk to each other about how he’s smart yet underestimated because of his gruffness and working-class background. (No less a figure than Teddy Roosevelt is recruited for the purpose.) One really good touch is that the magic powers are used very creatively: the characters not only notice their required secondary powers, they deliberately hone them.
Awareness Through Movement. A very strange book which is under the impression that the full development of one’s personhood happens when one has excellent posture and moves gracefully and efficiently, apparently based on the logic that whatever things one does as a person they are probably all going to involve movement. Contains a lot of descriptions of various stretches, which are probably about as good for you as easy yoga, but at least the yoga gives you the opportunity to learn to do a headstand.
Language in Thought and Action. Holy shit Eliezer ripped this book off a LOT. (And did it better, IMO.)
The Expanded Dialectical Behavioral Therapy Skills Training Manual. Sort of an expansion pack for DBT. Several of the classic DBT modules have new skills and several old skills are rebranded. In addition, there are new modules: setting boundaries, figuring out that the truth lies between the two extremes, basic CBT, and building routines and structure into one’s life. For several of the skills, I would have appreciated more examples and specific guidance: telling people “you should be gentle!” is not terribly helpful unless you more clearly outline what is and isn’t gentle. I suppose that’s what therapists are for. However, some of the skills were extremely well-operationalized, particularly the Routines one, which contained many long and helpful lists of things you really should be doing on a regular basis like “talking to friends” and “watching TV shows you enjoy.”
Starship Troopers. Every woman adores a Fascist, the boot in the face, the brute brute heart of a brute like you.
(In other words: I liked it.)
Dataclysm. The first book by the author of OKTrends. I was sort of expecting more meat to it. While I appreciated the reiteration of several classic OKTrends posts (sorry, black women and women over 22), I was sort of expecting more, well, content. It definitely includes some “man, I’ve got to tell people THIS” sections, including one on the linguistics of Twitter and one on the most common words in people’s profiles by sexuality and gender, but mostly it’s just… meh.
Queer and Pleasant Danger. Kate Bornstein’s memoir about being a nice Jewish boy who grows up into a kinky genderqueer lesbian borderline by way of Scientology. Like all of Kate Bornstein’s books, it comes off as if you’re getting coffee with your cool aunt; this time, instead of giving you advice about your mental health problems or your gender, zie’s telling stories from her checkered past. The book is actually intended to be for hir children: because Kate is a suppressive person, hir children are not allowed to interact with her. Zie decided to become a famous author so that if they ever wanted to track hir down or even read about hir life they could.
The Leather Daddy and the Femme. An excellent porn novel. The protagonist is an assigned-female-at-birth femme genderqueer who passes as male well enough that she’s picked up by a leather daddy. Queer, kinky, and strangely sweet. I am now vaguely upset that my life has not included getting gangbanged by leather daddies and trans women. (Yet. Growth mindset.)
Ann Onora Mynuz said:
>In the last few pages, the author writes an alternate universe in which Ayn Rand had a child, which apparently makes her become a well-respected philosopher and author instead of an abusive asshole. Like, seriously? Would you pull this shit about a man?
I can’t comment on this book in particular and the way they use it, but yes, absolutely.
Children as a catalyst for redemption is an extremely common trope/meme.
LikeLiked by 3 people
callmebrotherg said:
> Children as a catalyst for redemption is an extremely common trope/meme.
Goodness. Apparently I have some *very* strong feelings about that idea, because I keep wanting to reply to your comment with a vociferous condemnation of the idea, even though the rational part of me sees nothing at all to suggest that you actually endorse the idea, nor anything to suggest that people who do endorse the idea will come across my comment and be appropriately persuaded.
Hurray for heightened self-awareness, I suppose. >:] Now to figure out *why* this is so.
LikeLiked by 3 people
stillnotking said:
If anything, it’s a more common trope for men than women: Three Men and a Baby, Mr. Mom, The Professional, Liar Liar, approximately half of John Wayne movies…
LikeLiked by 3 people
Walter said:
Ok, not to offend tho, but it certainly does happen. I know folks who have become parents (dudes & ladies both) who have had their personalities radically altered by the experience. I know others who passed through unchanged, but there have definitely been those kind of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” deals.
Like, it isn’t inevitable, but its certainly possible. You are the average of your 5 best friends, yeah? Replacing one of them with a screaming football might change you (it might not, don’t get pissed).
LikeLike
ozymandias said:
It seems to be a fairly common fictional trope for men but not applied to actually existing famous people. (Very few people opine that Kant would have been a better philosopher if he’d had some babies.)
LikeLike
stillnotking said:
Well, Kant was pretty squishy already. 🙂
I’ve seen people opine that Hitler would’ve been nicer if he’d had kids; given the well-known reduction in serum testosterone from fatherhood, it might even be true. (But probably not: Goebbels is the obvious counter-example! I agree the trope is lazy at best.)
LikeLike
roe said:
I’ll make a stronger claim: there’s good reasons to believe the trope has basis in reality.
I mean, for one thing, you have to constantly try to suss out the wants of a creature who’s only method of expressing distress is to scream. And you have to put your needs aside in favour of their needs (3am? I can’t tell time and I’m hungry). I mean, essentially, you are in a bit of a master/slave relationship with your baby as master, and slaves really build a strong sense of what their master wants, which is empathy, right?
Plus, oxytocin. And, sorry, but women are the ones who breastfeed and get an oxytocin hit several times a day. Not to say that men don’t get oxytocin from baby interaction, but it’s kind of optional.
(Men have their own set of biochem changes – reduction in testosterone for eg.)
LikeLike
Fossegrimen said:
I am a man and being a single dad for three kids drastically changed my perspectives on enough things that I have zero problems seeing the premise as gender neutral.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Matthew said:
I’m also a single father of two, and I see the premise as gender neutral, but fairly silly as applied to either gender. I can’t think of any particular changes in my meta-ethics or practical ethics that occurred as a result of having children. As a matter of behavior, it shifted around whom I felt responsibility toward, but it didn’t make me more responsible. Then again, I was rather high in conscientiousness to begin with.
LikeLike
veronica d said:
According to the Wiki thing, Kate Bernstein is NB and prefers “ze/hir.” So yeah.
On the leather daddies, funny thing, last night I skipped a cool leather boy party cuz I wanted to stay home and do laundry.
It’s okay if you hate me now. I would understand.
LikeLike
veronica d said:
*Bornstein
Grrrrrrr! Stupid spellcheck!
(Hey, has anyone mentioned an edit function?)
LikeLike
ozymandias said:
Ack! I thought zie used she pronouns! I’ll fix it.
LikeLike
nancylebovitz said:
I’ve wondered whether Feldenkrais Method would have made Rand into a saner, kinder person. It’s based very much on non-judgementally starting from where you are.
And then you had a review of a Feldenkrais book…. I don’t get the impression you’ve tried it. It isn’t stretches. You’re supposed to stay within your range of easy movement. It’s gentle, easy movements done with a lot of attention, and they give you parts of your movement repertoire you’ve forgotten or never learned.
Feldenkrais probably overestimated the value of his system, but it does improve ease and pleasure, and it also gave me the ability to get up on bar stools easily. I’m 4’11”, and until I did a Feldenkrais exercise that improved my hip mobility, getting up on a bar stool was clumsy and annoying.
Anyway, I recommend Uncommon Sensing— you get a free lesson every month, and it’s easier to follow a podcast than a book.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Walter said:
I never felt like Ayn Rand was insane. I disagree with her, but I don’t think she needs to be saner.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tori Ticviking said:
That self-therapy book is one of the most harmful bits of of “pop-psych” I’ve ever encountered.
I never found out all the details, but after I brought a copy of it to therapy my therapist blew up about how awful the whole system was before he asked for a few moments to calm down. When he returned he explained that he was in the middle of helping victims of a “Tough Love” boot-camp that had chosen to use that book/system instead of have a therapist on staff. He suggested that I toss the book and ignore it as an easy way to give myself false memories of abuse.
LikeLiked by 1 person
callmebrotherg said:
I’m often late to the classics, so I feel better knowing that there are some intelligent, respectable people out there who have only now gotten around to, say, Starship Troopers.
I don’t think that I have seen any post, book, story, or article end with such a fantastic parentheses.
//Specifically, the techniques to work with parts in IFS seem very similar to the creation and empowerment of thoughtforms/tulpas.//
Hm. I may have to pick the book up at some point. I’ve got several tulpa-related story ideas to get to at some point.
//However, I am generally in support of the “make lots of lists” strategy of time management, and am pleased about the new list ideas it has given me.//
Ahaha.
//In a lot of Sagan’s writings, it feels like Sagan was a theologian for a religion that didn’t exist yet//
Out, out, damned story ideas!
(Or not. I guess you can stay here, but only if you don’t distract me from the story ideas I’m already paying attention to.)
//The book is actually intended to be for hir children: because Kate is a suppressive person, hir children are not allowed to interact with her. Zie decided to become a famous author so that if they ever wanted to track hir down or even read about hir life they could.//
This in itself would also make a good story.
LikeLike
Sniffnoy said:
Quick readability note: You can do italics <i>like so</i> (the “like so” would be italicized if I were doing this for real, as I am here). One can also quote people by putting their text <blockquote>inside a block quote</blockquote>, but with this blog’s stylesheets it causes the text to be really large and ugly and so for readability purposes I would disrecommend it (at least for now).
LikeLiked by 1 person
callmebrotherg said:
Thank you. >:]
LikeLike
Aceso Under Glass said:
Interesting. Buddha and the Borderline described IFS as the next step after DBT in her treatment for BPD because it acknowledged feelings without enlarging them. Not questioning your experience at all,: just noting variation.
LikeLike
multiheaded said:
(CW SUICIDE)
For some reason all these book descriptions make me want to kill myself right now, and acutely remind me that there is literally nothing in the world for me. Oh god, they sound like fucking horrible books. I hate them all so much already.
(I am fine.)
(Starship Troopers was so fucking boring. Ozy, if you like sci-fi about army people in space, read the Gaunt’s Ghosts series by Dan Abnett.)
(It’s not actually sci-fi, they are just fantasy action novels with guns.)
LikeLike
davidmikesimon said:
Also, if you like comedy sci-fi about army people in space, try the “Phule’s Company” series. It’s very light fare, which is exactly the ticket sometimes.
LikeLike
David Chapman said:
If you like The Leather Daddy and the Femme, you’d probably enjoy “The Calyx of Isis” in Pat Califia’s Macho Sluts. Working the same theme, and coming out of the same SF s/m genderqueer subculture, a decade earlier.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ozymandias said:
Macho Sluts is delightful!
LikeLiked by 1 person
stillnotking said:
I read some of Correia’s stuff after the Sad Puppies thing blew up. I enjoyed it, but it’s obviously pulp — he comes from the same tradition as authors like Steve Perry and Nick Pollotta, who enlivened my childhood considerably, but didn’t exactly elevate sci-fi. I wouldn’t vote for him for a Hugo; didn’t he turn down the nomination or something?
The most fascinating book about awareness that I’ve ever read is Zen and the Psychology of Transformation, by Hubert Benoit. He wrote it after a back injury kept him bed-ridden and almost entirely immobile for years, giving him little to do besides some amazingly focused and incisive introspection. While it talks about Zen a lot, it’s from an explicitly Western perspective, and doesn’t require any familiarity with Buddhist tradition to be comprehensible.
LikeLike
PDV said:
This isn’t exactly an open thread, but it’s closer than most things, so: Have you done any analysis of the kink survey you put put a few months back? I’m interested to hear the results.
LikeLiked by 2 people
embrodski said:
While I personally loved the full-blown meta fanfic that is “Redshirts”, I can see why some people don’t think it’s quite Hugo material. But in defence of it being awarded the 2013 Hugo… 2013 was a year with extremely weak contenders.
“Throne of the Crescent Moon” and “Blackout” were both ludicrously bad, to the point that one is tempted to lose faith in SFdom for the mere fact that they were nominated. “Cpt Vorpatril’s Alliance” is a good read if you’ve read the dozen previous books in the series, but only mediocre if you haven’t (and I’m of the opinion that Hugo-nominated books should always be able to stand on their own. “2312” was the only real competition, but it was too long, too dry, and too slow. It had some amazing visuals and cool ideas, but suffered greatly by being boring often. So, while it may not be amazing, Redshirts was (IMHO) the best book of the five we could vote on.
I probably would have ranked Redshirts highly no matter what the competition was, that style of book strongly appeals to me. But given the other four books nominated in 2013, it didn’t take any sort of conspiracy for Redshirts to go home with the rocket.
LikeLike
ozymandias said:
That makes sense! Any idea why 2013 was such a weak year?
LikeLiked by 1 person
embrodski said:
I couldn’t even begin to guess. Maybe there are underlying reasons, but I’m willing to just chalk it up to the vagaries of chance.
LikeLike
Emily Horner (@emhornerbooks) said:
In my experience the “sweet spot” for the Hugos tends to be accessible commercial fiction with pretty good literary chops. An excellent novel that is too niche or too literary is likely to have more trouble than a merely pretty good novel with more commercial appeal. Looking at the Locus recommended reading list for the year — virtually all of the novels have me saying “That might be really GOOD, but it’s too niche to win” — too literary, too hard-SF, too offbeat, or just a book that never got much commercial traction.
Probably somebody better-read in hard SF than I am can point to a book that should have won instead (The Killing Moon? Caliban’s War?) — I thought that The Drowning Girl was very fine indeed, but a literary horror novel about a mentally ill trans woman is probably a non-central example of a potential Hugo winner.
Not necessarily a bad year for science fiction and fantasy, but perhaps a bad year for the kinds of books that win Hugos.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Illuminati Initiate said:
For some reason 2312 made me really, really pissed at the main characters (for being murderers by reintroducing the animals), while sometimes I can read books where I disagree with the protagonists quite strongly without getting angry at the book (as in The Lathe of Heaven), I don’t know why that was.
LikeLike
LTP said:
I know this is honing in on a random side comment, but while I do think LessWrong isn’t a cult, it does have *a lot* of cultish tendencies and features, which I is why I avoid the site. But good to know you all aren’t excommunicating people, at least.
LikeLike
Fossegrimen said:
I’m fully on board with Hard Magic not being Hugo worthy except perhaps in a bad year, but I suspect you are slightly mistaken about the hero characteristic;
According to the author, and becoming more obvious in the later books in the series, Faye is the hero and Jake is the sidekick.
LikeLike
ozymandias said:
Oh NICE. That is actually making me consider picking up book two in the series, Faye KICKS ASS.
…does he get any better at writing witty dialogue because to be honest his dialogue makes me cringe
LikeLike
Fossegrimen said:
I think he gets steadily better at writing in general really and Hard Magic is one of his earlier works. The rest is still pulp though, which is by design so if you want ‘high literature’ you need to look elsewhere.
Regarding Faye, reading book one and thinking she’s not the hero is like reading book one of LOTR and thinking Frodo is a wimp. She grows a LOT 😉
LikeLike
Tracy Wilkinson said:
I’m very late to this, but out of interest, why did you read Starship Troopers as fascist? I mean, the book’s pretty clearly a commentary on US society of the 1950s and ’60s and while the US of the 1950s and 60s had some things in common with the Nazis (eg explicit government racism, conscription), it also had a lot of things not in common (eg Nazis went in for central planning, not so much Americans, 1950s US was starting moving away from corporal punishment, not so much the Nazis.)
(Note: Heinlein was anti-racist, anti-conscription, pro-corporal punishment. Complex guy.)
LikeLike