This was a ~300p nonfiction book about the modern phenomenon about the gradual decline in Church attendance in the United States. It was written by a combination of priests/pastors and sociologists looking at the data and speaking with people and coming up with conclusions.
The first half of the book discussed demographics, dividing the different groups leaving the church and trying to discover why they leave. The second half discusses strategies to try to keep people involved/try to get people back to the church. This book is written primarily about the decline in the evangelical movement, but also discusses the changes in Mainline and Catholic faiths.
I thought it was good, but what do I know.
I read Jo Walton’s book about the Hugo’s last year, and enjoyed it. I decided to read more by her, so I checked this out from my library. I enjoyed this book too.
This book discusses various SF&F (but mainly Sci Fi) books published in the last 50 years. It discusses about 100 books, and why they became instant classics… and it also discusses forgotten books which are nonetheless noteworthy. The author talks in depth about series she enjoys (Bujold’s Vorkosigan’s series and Brust’s Vlad Taltos series), but skips some major series (it does not talk about Lord of the Rings, but instead talks about the Hobbit). It also talks about related subjects, like the Suck Fairy, reading incomplete series, and the difference between Critiquing and Reviewing.
This is a book about the modern conception of trauma, neurosis formation and recovery from that trauma. I found it to be well written, but not perfect. I only read about half of it before I had to return it to the library. I’m DNFing it for now, not because the book is bad but because I’m just not in the mindframe right now to read something so heavy. I’ll come back to it eventually.
If I am going to provide some critique on this book, I’ll say that it needs to cite it’s sources. This book makes many plausible, yet unfounded, claims about the human psyche. I would like if it would talk about medical literature more often, citing research by trained doctors. I felt like that the author used his personal experiences with clients too often to describe vast swaths of mental conditions. I would have liked if the author brought in evidence provided by outside sources more often to reinforce his points.
John Mendez- Book Reviews and More 