Angury

That thread was an interesting read, thanks for referring me to it. I also have to say it takes some courage to talk so openly about yourself. It's lovely of you to share your story, and it's clear you have a passion for reading and books. I actually feel a bit more motivated to go sit in my room and read a book for hours and hours, after looking through the pictures of your book collections. I shall stalk your thread and see how your reading continues throughout this year.

Wow, 300! Haha, I'm almost in the same position as you. I'm also a student, so sometimes I live near my university, and other times during vacations live at home with my parents. It's a bit of a drag having to carry my books from one place to another, so I do want to lighten the load. When I get my own house though, I plan to have a massive library with books stacking high into the ceiling. That is very inspirational, and I think I might try and make that my aim as well. Otherwise it's quite easy to get distracted by new books and forget that massive TBR list hanging on your wall. It's also nice to have a set goal before going out and indulging yourself in a bookshop. What makes you feel intimidated by it? I've never read any of the author's work so I'm not aware of his writing style or anything like that. Ah, so if you've leafed through it you've noticed the bizarre typography throughout the book. I don't think it was difficult.. just long. It can be a bit annoying at times trying to figure out which line you're supposed to read next, but more than anything else it's just a bit lengthy. I found the story a bit dry at the start but it definitely picks up. And I'd never read a book with that sort of strange writing style with words going all over the page, so that was quite refreshing in itself. He has a reason for playing around with the sentences though; the way each page is structured closely reflects the storyline, which I think is a smart thing to do.Don't worry about it being difficult though.. there aren't any long words that you have to look up in a dictionary or anything like that. I think it's more difficult in the sense that it's different. Unfortunately I have yet to read any of his books, but he is one of my idols. It's so nice to have someone in the public eye who is a big bookworm and advocates things like autodidactism and thinking for yourself. I notice you're from Finland - is he popular over there?I don't know if you've watched any of his documentaries or interviews, but I would definitely recommend them. Here is a particular video where he describes in the English language in his wonderful eloquence: I absolutely agree. I am particularly interested in Psychiatry and Neurology, so mainly what happens when the brain and mind stops working. And I also think the link between Philosophy, Psychology and Personality is rather interesting - they all seem interconnected. I think such books also reveal a lot about yourself, and how fragile the human mind can be at times.

Hey, good questions. Regarding your first question, do you mean what motivates Amir to come back or to take Sohrab away (or both)? As for your second question, I think it's up to the individual person, but ultimately most people would choose their family. I think conscription is an awful thing and no one should be forced into such a horrific act. However, I do think there are people out there who would be willing to stay and fight. There are some patriotic people out there, and some incredibly courageous human beings who believe they can, and should make a difference no matter how small. But again, I don't think everyone is like that. I know I would choose my family, but maybe that has to do with my age as well? I wonder if you're more likely to stay and fight for your country if you're older, or not a parent? I guess it depends how much your family relies on you, and how much faith you have in your own abilities to stay and revolt. Then again, people can show some surprising acts of bravery when the circumstances call for it - perhaps it's not that easy to predict.

Ah, so your mum works in Public Health? That's one of the specialities I'm interested in - it's more about making a difference on a larger scale. Do you mind me asking how the Dutch healthcare system works? I suppose I could just google it, but it would be interesting to hear your point of view. I'm currently trying to find more psychology/psychiatry books - I will look that one up, thanks for mentioning it. Chemistry is considered to be one of the hardest subjects to study here in the UK at A Level (an exam students do at 18). Yet it's such an important part of our lives. I was awful at practicals though - I would always end up spilling something or mixing the wrong thing, or contaminating my instruments! I'm a bit of a fan of David Eagleman as well. I'm not sure how popular he is over there, but he is an American neuroscientist - he has quite a popular book called Incognito: The Secret Life of the Brain that is also currently on my to-read list. I also have a long list of books written about healthcare from patients points of view (mainly those who have been accessing the system for a long time). I think the main way we can improve healthcare is by listening to patients experiences. I don't know if you've heard, but there was a big scandal here in the UK regarding a hospital and the sorts of care some of the patients received in nursing homes - some of the stories were horrific.

Each book is so packed with storylines and action, I can't even remember what happens in half of them! I began to like the story much more when Gosh, I remember more than I thought I did. The thing I loved most about the Wheel of Time was the variety of cultures in the WoT world, and the detail Robert went into when describing them. Even as the reader you could begin to pick up where someone was from, based on the way they spoke and the clothes they were described in. It felt as if the world truly existed.

This is what I've been told as well. I'm a few chapters into 1Q84 and it's the first book of his I've read so far. I'm enjoying his writing and the story so far, but I've heard many people say that you should begin with Norwegian Wood to introduce yourself to his work. I'm wondering whether I should switch and begin reading Norwegian Wood instead - particularly as it's much shorter than the trilogy of 1Q84.

I just watched the trailer for The Love Punch today and will definitely be going to see it. It looks like a good comedy, and the cast is fantastic. Also, I adore Emma Thompson. Here's the trailer for anyone who's interested:

I went to see The Grand Budapest Hotel today. I was also the only person in the cinema so it felt like I had my own private screening which was nice. It was a weird film to say the least. I didn't find many parts funny, as it seems to be advertised, but it wasn't a bad film either. Not one I'd watch again, and I guess it's a breath of fresh air from the constant action/rom-com films etc.

That has happened to me before as well. I've found that as my experiences grow and my beliefs change, books that I once found enticing are now dull. I find it interesting to look back to the books I used to read and think about what made me enjoy them - the plotline? The characters? The way the story was told? etc. I'm not sure if I'll read them again either. It's such a massive series, I don't think I'd ever have time to reread them again, or the determination. And it's not like I can just read one of the books in the middle of the series, because I've forgotten so many of the plotlines.Although I'm the sort of person who can never give away my books. They become a part of me. A lot of them have my writing scrawled over the pages, and the pages dog-eared.

I never said they were well written. I used to read them as a child because they were the perfect form of escapism for me then, and I think that's the reason many kids read them. I see nothing wrong with reading a book purely for fun and entertainment - it's why I think the Dan Brown books are so popular. I don't know many people who claim they are the peak of literature, but they are good for light reading when on holiday etc. Out of interest, which dystopian novels have you read? Some of what you have said does ring true to certain dystopian novels, but not to others. I guess we see things differently. I don't really care too much about the author's background - in fact, the greater the differences between me and them, the better! It means I can view the world from a different point of view and see how different cultures and families can affect your behaviour.Even if I don't agree with the point of view (and many times I do not), I still want to try and understand the thought processes that lead to certain actions, and why people are different. Would you ever read/have you read Hitler's Mein Kampf? That is a very big generalisation to make.Have you read any of the recent Russian literature?

I try not to close myself into one genre, and read as many different books as I can. Even if I don't enjoy a book, I always feel I've learnt something from it, such as certain writing styles used by the author. I remember reading The Great Gatsby when I was quite young and being confused about the hype surrounding it. No matter how hard tried, I just couldn't get into it. I think I just read it at the wrong time - if I were to reread it now, I feel I would have a different perspective. I think the impact of some books depends on when you read them in your life. I love the Harry Potter books because I was part of the generation who grew up with them. My parents on the other hand can't see the hype. How come? I love dystopian novels for the exact opposite reason - they show how the world can change so suddenly, and the power people can have over each other. Humanity can be responsible for some truly horrific acts. I'm quite a pessimistic person though.

I was just about to create a topic about DFW, glad I found an existing one. I was about a quarter of the way through Infinite Jest before I had to stop, then wasn't able to get back into it. It is a bit dense, especially with all the little references scattered throughout. However, I've heard it is worth the trek, so I am planning to get back into it. You've probably noticed that Infinite Jest is often mentioned in those "Most Difficult Books" lists, so make sure you have the stamina to get through it. Personally, I would recommend beginning with his short story collection, such as A Brief Interview with Hideous Men. I'm not sure if I would describe his writing as eloquent, but he has a way of describing thoughts and feelings that you believe only you possessed. It's quite comforting reading some of his short stories. I wonder if anyone else has read Infinite Jest? I need to get back into it, but I don't want to turn reading into a chore.

As a healthcare student, I read a lot of nonfiction books regarding medicine, healthcare and science in general. I'm wondering whether anyone else has any similar interests? There's a variety of medical literature out there. One of the more famous names is probably Oliver Sacks, a British neurologist. One of his most famous books is The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat. One thing that stands out in Oliver's books is that he makes his patients appear human. All too often it is easy to get absorbed into the diagnosis and the pathology behind the diseases, and forget that there is a person behind all of those long-winded words. Oliver uses his sharp writing skills to describe the impact of the often fascinating diseases on the patient and their family, talking about their day-to-day life and how it's been affected. There are some beautifully poignant moments in the book which illustrate Oliver's caring nature towards his patients. His books also show how complex the brain is, and how much we take for granted until those abilities are suddenly lost to us. There is also a UK-based psychiatrist called Max Pemberton who has written a number of books about his job as a junior doctor, and then as a psychiatrist working with the homeless. Like Oliver Sacks, you can see that he really cares about his patients and sees them as more than just a package of diseases. He only talks about a few patients in his books, so that you begin to build a relationship with them as well and feel just as concerned as he was when dealing with their illnesses. I also think he writes well - not in an Oscar Wilde kind of poetic style, but in a humorous manner which makes the reading quite light. I'm also rather interested in the history of medicine, so I'm going to mention The Rise and Fall of Modern Medicine by James Le Fanu. This is quite a popular book among medical applicants here in the UK, as it describes most of the main scientific and medical breakthroughs and how they have impacted the care we deliver today. It's an interesting book to read if you'd like to find out more, not only about how science and medicine has evolved throughout the years, but also what is set in store for the future based on current developments. I think when people consider medial books, they may gravitate towards "rare" and "exotic" diseases. If anyone has watched the House MD TV series or is simply interested in the rarer side of medicine, Every Patient Tells a Story: Medical Mysteries and the Art of Diagnosis by Lisa Sanders is a good book to read. I'm also particularly interested in the healthcare system, mainly here in the UK but I've recently gained an interest in international health as well. I think things like the placebo effect are very interesting, and I have an interest in the mind and psychiatry/neurology in general. Is anyone else interested in those sorts of topics? I've read a couple of the "Anti-Psychiatry movement" books (Thomas Szasz being the main guy), the most recent of which is Cracked: Why Psychiatry is doing more harm than good by James Davies. In it he talks about the overprescription of antidepressants and the negative influences of the pharmaceutical companies on research and subsequent prescriptions by doctors. I found he wrote quite persuadably at times, and I did find myself agreeing with him in some of his chapters. But ultimately, I do think these kinds of topics need to be handled very carefully as there are many people out there who rely on such drugs that he talks about. I've found it can be a bit of a sensitive issue with some people; Psychiatry still does not seem to be held in the same esteem as other medical specialities by some members of the public, which I think is a pity. There is certainly a lot of stigma revolving around mental illness. If you are interested in reading about the pharmaceutical companies influences on drug prescrptions etc, I would instead recommend two of Ben Goldacre's (a British doctor) books: Bad Pharma and Bad Science. I've rambled on a bit, but I really just wanted to see if anyone else has read any medical/sciencey books, or has such an interest.

I think it's difficult (heck, impossible) to please everyone with a series finale. There will always be people who prefer a different ending. As long as the ending was what Robert Jordan wanted, I guess that's what matters. It is his world after all. I would love to see them make a TV series out of the books - I can see too many problems with trying to make a film, not least the fact that many people would see it as a LOTR copy. What was your favourite book in the series btw?

That sounds like a good plan, reading the books in their order. I would do that myself except I got a bit bored with Colour of Magic. What book are you on in the series atm? My aim is to finish Reaperman pretty soon. Btw, did you notice Terry Pratchett's cameo in Going Postal?

I would rather take the opinions of a group of experienced individuals than the opinion of just one person. Which is also why I'd prefer to have a leader who is willing to take his teams views into account and come to a decision based on their views, and not just his own. I noticed you mentioned CEO/stakeholders, and I realise I'm thinking about it from a healthcare point of view where it is more about multidisciplinary teams, rather than a business point of view which seems to be where you're coming from. I imagine it differs between sectors, as I always imagine the business world to be much more ruthless, whereas in healthcare your primary aim is the wellbeing of the patient.

What did you think of Deepak Chopra's book? I have a bit of an inherent dislike for him. I didn't know you were interested in Asian books! I don't know if you've heard about the book Train to Pakistan by Kushwant Singh? His death was on the news recently. His name has only been familiar to me since his death, but I have since become interested in his work. Have you thought about reading more of Haruki Murakami's books btw? I was a bit surprised how similar his writing was to a lot of western novels I'd written, but then I read somewhere that he was influenced a lot by western authors so I guess that makes sense.

What's wrong with the "we are all a team" motto? :s I agree with you in your previous statement that a small gap is necessary - but I believe it should only be a "small" gap. Anything more than that and I don't think anyone would feel comfortable to discuss their ideas with their leader. Then it just becomes an issue of "he has power over me." I've never seen any of Donald Trump's shows, nor do I know anything about business. As I've said, I have very little experience of leadership so I don't think I'm really in a position to say much about it. Regarding your last point, aren't there some companies that were started simply by a group of friends who had an idea and decided to work together? They didn't decide that one person should be the leader etc, they just worked as group based on their interests. And it's only once the company became big enough that they started to employ staff and build the whole hierarchy with a leader etc. This is only from the very few articles that I've read, so feel free to correct me. I don't have much interest in business. However, I do agree with your point that a leader shouldn't be picked simply based on knowledge. As mentioned previously, I believe it has to do with ability to utilise the skills of the team and set the wheels in motion (which is why I'm confused why you think the "we're all a team" motto is nonsense).

Generally the leader is chosen by the team as someone who has good knowledge of the topic and is able to use the abilities of the team members efficiently. They should be respected on this basis. I think if the leader is too aloof, it will make them appear arrogant. There is a danger that the leader will fall Ito the stereotype of being too bossy or taking all the credit, I think that is less likely to happen if there isn't that gap in the first place. I agree it is ultimately up to the leader to make the decisions. But that decision is based on the teams opinion, not the leaders own biased opinion - otherwise the project is just based on what the leader thinks and there's no point in having a team.Regarding your last point, that sounds to me like something a teacher would have to do in front of kids. I should probably add that I don't have much experience in a leadership role. I just imagine that as professionals, the leader shouldn't need to be too authoritative - everyone should be behaving as adults anyway. It's the leaders role to make sure everyone understands their task and there is an effective division of labour. I guess when there is conflict it is the leader who has to sort things out and that's where the authority comes in. But I would have far more respect for a leader who knows what he's doing rather than one who keeps a distance from his colleagues. Because the team members are his colleagues, not his minions I do think there is a time and place for that small gap to come through, I would just like to hope it isn't needed very often. Maybe I'm being too optimistic.

Apologies, I should have mentioned. The first one is the Strahov Theological Hall in Prague, and the second is the Codrington Library in Oxford. By simple I was referring to the black and white colours, rather than the bright gold and red seen in the first picture.

Interesting, I've always believed the opposite. If the leader is seen as "one of them" then the team members feel more comfortable sharing their ideas and opinions with them. And a more comfortable setting means the team is more likely to complete their tasks efficiently. If the leader is seen as being on another level, then the team may feel as if they cannot get their ideas across, or may even feel daunted by the idea of communicating with the leader. This is just from personal experience of course, but I tend to be much happier when the leader is someone I feel I can go to when I have a problem, and that is more difficult when the person doesn't seem to be on your level.

That quote is beautiful, thanks for posting it. I'm going to find out more about this novel now. The list from Columbia University looks enticing, although they seem a bit dense for me. Best of luck with your reading.

That's beautiful. I also really like this one, it's very simple but the colours work well together:

Out of interest, what about the book didn't you like? I thought it was alright, but there didn't seem to be much of a story. I didn't know it was that hyped about in the first place. I wouldn't call it a bad book, but not something I would recommend either. Anyway, my list of overrated books: Catch-22 by Joseph Heller - I couldn't even finish this mammoth. I've heard it's the book people have given up on the most, and I can see why. It just didn't seem to go anywhere, and the writing made it a chore to get through. The Alchemist by Paul Coelho - I still don't understand why this is so popular. It seemed to be more of a self-help book than an actual story. The writing was very simple which was the biggest disappointment for me. The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams - perhaps I had big expectations for this, but I couldn't get into it. I didn't find anything funny about it, nor was it an interesting read. I would put Catcher in the Rye and Great Gatsby there as well, but I think if I reread them I might have a different perspective. As far as I can remember, the writing in the Great Gatsby was really well done, it was just the story I found to be lacking.

Funny I came across this thread, I was just having a similar conversation with CuriousGeorgette. Looking back, I think the book was quite simple and I'm surprised at how popular it is, especially all the rave it receives in the media. As for social competence, I agree that it is subjective, but I think there are certain behaviours that are expected of you, simply as etiquette. And that normally differs from culture to culture. I'm not sure what you mean about leadership and there being no way to be accepted? I think as a leader you will always have people who don't agree with your style, but as long as you listen to everyones opinion with equal weighting and explain your decisions, as well as accept feedback, then you will receive respect. If you can complete the task at hand efficiently and use everyones abilities (division of labour etc), then I think you will be accepted as a leader.