Ryan Wenneker

Wanted to re read... forgot how much this moved me.

There were some really honest stumbling through deep concepts and a recycled back on some of these themes and Nick further refined, or re-defined his position... it was remarkably engaging.

In chapter 2 there was a horrifying statement - that Grief is an expression of God's nature. That there is a transformative force it evokes.

I fought this concept on a visceral level - as I was at the time challenged by the upcoming anniversary of a death of a dear friend, of long relationship, the effective loss of those friendships -and the paradox of the creation of spaces for vibrant new relationships.

I have since checked out the Red Hand Files and finished the book and I'm not sure I WANTED to share that view of God, but at the same time... it cannot be refuted in the context of his experience and in his sharing and talking through his thoughts, the power of such brought me to at least understand his position, and even wish to work towards incorporating some of that into my own coping tools.

While I find myself wondering if this would be helpful for those themselves grieving and I cannot say “yes this will help you process and understand grief”; I can say this explores topics around grief, creation, loss, and spirituality in a way that, ultimately, adds a language scaffold to grieving that can serve as a building point for a conversation (internal or external) around such loss.

A touching, and hopeful book.

It was a very clever alternate history idea and well imagined.

And as a period piece done in the oeuvre of that a compilation of the diaries and first-person narrative of Lewis and Clark's it's very much in line with such a collection of that fictional collection.

In that is very well done, and kept that tonality well.

So separately -
The idea I liked.
The execution (the technical aspect of keeping itself as a period-appropriate collection of writings) - it's done well.

I am wondering if it would have been better to have just written it without that limitation as I think it hindered the retelling of the story.

This reads like a long-form CV for Omarosa.

I give her FULL CREDIT for the way she's handling the rollout of the book, but its hardly worth the work up to hear that - in the end - she thinks Diet Coke has made the President susceptible to Dementia.

Its also rather excessively obvious she has a bone to pick with General Kelly.

There was cheap shot taken about his son's death. I think that was unfortunate and didn't need to be put in there.

Beyond that - its not really all that much of an expose or revelation.

Its an interesting read immediately after reading Guns, Germs and Steel. Serendipitous timing.


I just Finished Eating Animals - by Jonathan Safran Foer

Meat is Murder.

Delicious, Juicy murder.

I liked the book, an interesting next step past The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan. I've been to a couple of factory farms for animals, and my family is mostly agribusiness background so I'm not surprised by its conclusions.

Its an eye opener for those who haven't been through such.
As my father (cattleman/farmer/insurance salesman/financial adviser/terrible joke teller) is dead I can say I eat more vegetable than animal protein these days without much fear of his retribution, but I like the inference that there is a market for humane slaughter / meat prep facilities.


http://www.eatinganimals.com/