I listened to his book a few months ago. Nothing about it sticks in my brain except that there was nothing to it that I had not heard before. Which may be good because I don't recall any glaring errors either. Still hours spent listening to something that was neither memorable nor contributed to my knowledge or well being was not a good use of my time.
That said. If you are a geek and tend to know a lot about spiritual well being, neuroscience, plasticity, integrative medicine, and such, this is not the book for you. If, however,this sounds like something that you might be interested in but don't know where to start, this might be a good intro.
From the cheesy new age background music to the smarmy delivery of the text I knew immediately that this book was not for me. The music was so distracting and the lack of content quickly left me cold. Nothing could compel me to complete even a third of this short audiobook. Listen to the sample first. Past that, I have no idea if the book offers any valid suggestions or not.
No, because the information was easy to absorb and clear on the first listen. However, I could see someone re-listening to it easily. Also, it's not a book that you have to read from start to finish. It's easy to do a chapter or two one day and then another chapter the next. You won't get lost.
I have purchased books by Gildan Media before and been sorely disappointed in their production and content. But, since this book was recommended by a friend, I thought it would make a good commute book and if production disappointed, I'd just read the book. Either they came to the realization that they needed quality voice talent or it was just a stroke of luck, but Karen Saltus' read of the work was wonderful. Engaging, nice pace, a few mispronunciations or possibly regional pronunciations, but, nothing glaring or that I can even remember now. I'm not saying that I'd listen to Karen read the phone book, but I'd sit and listen to her read the Yellow Pages ads.
Sheckley has often been compared to Douglas Adams, so, I won't hesitate to compare them here. Where Adams knew just how long to linger on a subject before it got old or preachy, Sheckly did not. One example is how long after he had made a point he kept conversations with the main character and the city dragging on.
It was dated and rather preachy.
Hodgman's other work, particularly in Year Zero has been much better. His characterization of 'the prize' was interesting, but, other characters were less distinct. I wonder if this had more to do with who was directing the production than Hodgman himself.
It's been a couple weeks since I listened to this and the characters were so forgettable that I can't recall one.
After listening to this book and a few of his short stories, it's obvious why people are not eagerly reading his works today - they just didn't age well.
Report Inappropriate Content