It's a great story - I love business history, especially about failure and recovery.
The narrator has a serious affect whenever he pronounces words with the letter "U". It's almost like he's intentionally trying to have some sort of blue-blood angle to certain words that make them sound like nobody would ever prounounce even in normal narration or conversation.He pronounces every "U", as "eeew", appropriate or not. I can kind of deal with this in words like "tuesday", but the way he says "institeewwtion" and "deewwk" (the university) borders on ludicrous (or, as he would say, "leeewdicrous"). It's particulary humorous listening to him try to insert his affect into the word "June", which he desperately wants to pronounce as "Jeeewne", but he knows it would sound utterly stupid, so he quickly reverts back to normal.It's not a bad enough issue to ruin the book, but you kind of grit your teeth and sigh every time he runs across a "U" word. If you're a bit more of an adverturous type, I guess you could turn it into a drinking game.
Audible: These banal questions for a review are horrible. Anyway, this book is certainly interesting - and the author is intelligent and thorough on the topic. However his constant digressions about "runaway juvenile violent crime" and "unprecedented criminality" painting a picture of an epidemic of psychopathy are neither accurate or honest.
Perhaps the original mid-90s publishing date can excuse this, but crime on the US and Canada, where the author has been drawing his anecdotes, has been drastically decreasing - not increasing - over the past two decades. This is especially true of violent crime.
While all starts well, when he turns the focus towards children at the end, his well thought out dissection of psychopathy takes on the clueless, uninformed tone of the frustrated parents he showcases - drawing way too many examples from film, TV and pop culture to be taken seriously. It's a damn shame, since he does begin to touch upon the true scourge psychopathy has wrought on society in the form of white collar criminals, con men and manipulators. However, he ends sounding like the narrator from a 1950s Reefer Madness short.
Redundant question, Audible.
Again, this review format is atrocious and horribly thought out. This is a non fiction book.
Interesting nonetheless. A worthwhile listen despite its flaws.
Yep. The topics and facts sure are intriguing - and fairly well explained.
The narrator is the worst part. He's staccato and disinterested. Reminds me of when the teacher would force the stoners to read out loud in high school. The guy has no flow and no expression.
What? This is the stupidest question I have ever seen. Seriously, Audible?
The author's sense of humor is horribly dry and corny. I understand trying to lighten things up but the jokes come off as amateur and groan-inducing. Stick to science. The intro explaining how he was "inspired" to write this book is numbing, too. Skip it.
No. I am not sure if I understand the obsession with Feynman. If anything, I found his anecdotes rambling and pseudo-intellectual. Dry wit without the wit, really. I know Mr. Feynman has a rabid fanbase - so I thought I'd give this a try, and see what all the obsession was about. I still don't get it. His rants aren't that deep, and are a little trite if anything. Ok, he learned look at things a little different. Fantastic. Yes, he had a fascinating and dynamic life. Yes, he was an exceedingly smart fellow. But interesting? Only insofar as "wow, you'd expect a scientist to be really boring!" and with a bar that low, these stories at least exceed that.I listen on my long 3 hour commute twice a week. I couldn't keep this on for the first hour.
Maybe if you're already a rabid fan of Feynman, this book is for you. If not, venture onwards, and skip this one.
The narration was fine.
Confusion, mainly, as to how people find Feynman so interesting.
Not at all. The narrator would define the noun
Almost every part except hearing it read out loud.
Her false accent, if you want to call it that, is way too distracting. She gets a little too weird describing the food, too (I know that's an integral theme in the book, but it shouldn't sound... sexual.) She does the forceful parts no justice, almost making a caricature of them.
Sad to see the whole series is narrated by the same person. I'm hoping she got some tips after the first and improved it - we'll see.
Report Inappropriate Content