[Medical Books]

xI hadn't heard of the scandal, that's pretty terrible.xxI don't mind .We all pay health insurance to an insurance company. There are several of them and they offer different packages, differing in what costs they will pay for you if you need health care. The minimum is the base package, which needs to have certain costs covered set by the government. You pay the health insurance each month (the base package cost is set by the government I think). There is something called 'eigen bijdrage', which is a set amount of money (set by the government). You will not have to pay more per year than the 'eigen bijdrage' (own contribution) for costs that are covered by insurance (excluding the set money you pay per month). So if you break your leg it will not cost you more than the own contribution. If your costs are lower than the own contribution, you only have to pay part of it or none at all, depending on your package of insurance etc. If you make multiple costs in a year, for example, dentist, GP and medication, the total amount you pay for covered costs is never more than the 'eigen bijdrage'. Not all packages cover all dentist costs for example so it depends on what you have. If a package covers more type of costs, you pay more per month so it depends on what health care you think you'll need. Our government gives people with an income below a certain amount money to help them pay their health insurance (the amount depends on their income).I hope this answers your question?

Thanks for posting such a detailed reply. Yes, that was very helpful. I was always a bit confused about insurance companies and even a bit wary, since my only knowledge about them came from negative experiences of other people in America.

 

The system you've described sounds decent though - especially as the government steps in if you're struggling with income. I also like the idea of 'eigen bijdrage.'

[George R.R Martin]

Good idea:

 

[Book buys: Internet or bookshop?]

I love the little cafes in Waterstones.

 

Waterstones seems to be the main bookstore here. I love browsing through their stores, although I've been to the one in my local citycentre so often now that I know where certain books are because of the way the shelves are organised in alphabetical order.

 

I especially enjoy looking at their special collections of classics, the book covers always look so beautiful.

When it comes to buying books though, I am a fan of the internet. I generally check if a book is available on the kindle first, otherwise I order them from Amazon anyway. Since getting a Waterstones card I've also been buying books off the Waterstones website.

 

My stacks of books are getting a bit big now, so I've started to only buy books available on the kindle.

 

I know a few people who go to bookstores and note down books that catch their eye, then go off to buy them online where they can be found for a much cheaper price.

 

Waterstone's have just told me that their stamp scheme (you get a stamp when you spend £10 and then when your card is full - 10 stamps - you get a £10 voucher) finishes in April

Nooo!

[Frankie reads 2014]

(Do you live in a dorm, and have to vacate the premisis for summer? I live in the same city - and apartment - all year round so fortunately I don't have to haul my books anywhere.)

I change flats every year, and sometimes I have to change accommodation half way through the year if I'm working in a hospital that is too far away to commute. It also doesn't help that I tend to read books that are very thick. The kindle was a godsend for me.

 

The other rule that I found really helpful was that I could only buy books that were already on my wishlist (and no cheating allowed! It wouldn't do to promise oneself to add the book's title to the wishlist the minute I got home, after buying the copy... ).

I have this awful habit (well maybe its not that awful) of adding books to my Goodreads TBR list whenever I come across a book that sounds interesting on the forum or in a bookshop. It's why my TBR list is so long, I just keep adding books to it as I come across them. And as there are countless books out there, it seems to be a never ending journey. I am awful with self control though, and I guess if there's one thing I should be addicted to, it's books.

 

Well, it's fantasy. I still feel intimidated by books that are in the fantasy genre even though I've actually read more of them than I'd think. But even more so, it's a long series and I've gotten the idea that it's not the easiest place to start, for an unaccustomed fantasy reader. But don't let my fears stop you from giving the books ago! Others have enjoyed them immensely

You are the first person I've heard who is intimidated by fantasy. I often hear the opposite view from people; they believe fantasy is a genre for kids only, and not "proper fiction." I think you notice that hierarchy in other art forms as well - in music for example, many elitists tend to put classical music at the top of their lists and claim everything else like pop, RnB etc is beneath them. It's a pity I think, because then you're just caging yourself in. I think it's best to go out there and explore the different things on offer.

 

I think it's great that you try out fantasy books even if you feel a bit intimidated by them. I started reading classical books last year despite the apprehension that they would go over my head and were "too smart" for me. And I'm glad I gave them a go, because some of the classical books are now my favourites!

I've recently delved into a bit of poetry as well; I used to be a bit frightened of it when I was younger because I thought of it as something only smart, well-read literature students (like yourself! ) read.

 

I study languages so I'm very drawn to this type of thing, not very surprisingly

Ah, if you study languages you may find this interesting:

 

 

Basically from 3:25 onwards in the video he talks about how varied the English language is because of it's past history - the different civilisations that conquered the country and thereby influenced our way of speaking.

 

Here is another excellent video (only one minute long) where he talks about our reactions to swear words and how odd it is:

 

 

I think it is quite odd how we view certain words as being "wrong." And I don't know if it's a cultural thing either - the same swear words seem to be censored in other countries as well. Maybe it has to do with how society's views changes. Pejoratives regarding homosexuality are probably seen equivalent to some swear words today considering the legalisations of same sex marriage, whereas in the past I imagine such words would have been deemed normal. I wonder what words will be censored in the next few decades.

 

So is this your field of studies then? (I've had courses on linguistics, years ago... Courses like psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics. Absolutely fascinating stuff.).

I study medicine, so I am hoping to be a doctor someday (perhaps a psychiatrist or working in Public Health, but no doubt my desires will change as I continue through the course).

 

Regarding your last point, Stephen Fry did a documentary about the evolution of language which I think you might find interesting. It;s probably on youtube somewhere,

 

As you can probably tell, I am in love with Mr Fry. He is an Honorary Fellow at my university, and he also helped out with some research here in Bipolar Disorder. If I ever meet him, I want to give him a big hug!

[Athena's Reading List 2014]

I do have trouble processing input, particularly auditory input. So for me it's much easier to read a book than to watch TV, for example. So I don't watch much TV but instead read a lot. Reading does make me tired and often I need to stop to process what I've read, but it's much easier for me than hearing something, such as the TV, a game, music, people. I don't have many friends in real life whom I see often, so I don't spend any time on big parties or in a bar or something (I have autism, this would not be doable). I used to be a student but have graduated now. I'm very tired from going to university for many years and am dividing my time now between resting, reading, and doing little things around the house (such as cleaning up dishes) (and of course also doing other things such as using the computer for browsing the forum). If you want to know more, you can check my Member Thread, specifically the first post and this one. If you have any questions feel free to ask .

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.

[Frankie reads 2014]

I used to buy loads of books, just like a lot of people on here. In 2008-2009 I bought over 100 books per year, and in 2010-2011 I bought over 300 books per year. I read a lot of those books, but of course I had over 200 books to stay on TBR during those craziest years. Most of the books were secondhand or free, so it wasn't overly expensive, but thinking back, it was way overboard. For me, that is. I realized at some point that if I continued this way, I would never be able to read all the books I own. That I would have a massive TBR and I would get anxious about not being able to conquer it. And I'm living in a student apartment, so I'm going to have to move soon enough, and I don't want to die from carrying thousands of books to the first floor and a truck

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.

 

Chesilbeach conquered her TBR a few years ago: she didn't buy new books and concentrated on getting that TBR to zero. I thought it was very inspirational.

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.

 

I'm rather intimidated by GotM, so I'm not the one to talk about that book

 

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.

 

I admire you for having finished the book! Was it difficult? I mean it took you many months, but ... was it also hardcore, way out there, over the head stuff? I initially wanted to get a copy of the book to read because it's on a few reading challenge lists of mine, but I've leafed through it and now I'm very intrigued purely on its own merit.

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.

 

Haha, thank you Which Stephen Fry's have you read yourself? Have you read any of his fictional books?

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 do enjoy psychology and all things mad, most definitely. Fiction, non-fiction. The human mind is very fascinating!

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.

[Khaled Hosseini: The Kite Runner]

I have written this same question as a topic, but then the admin has sent me this page.

 

I have just finished The Kite Runner. I think it has different

layers and themes that can be discussed. I want to know your opinions on

some questions that I wonder. What motivates Amir exactly? Do you think

love or obligation motivates him? Second question is that do you think

that the book suggests if our country is under threat, we have an

obligation to stay and help effect change or we have an obligation to

yourself and your family’s safety.

Hey, good questions. Regarding your first question, do you mean what motivates Amir to come back or to take Sohrab away (or both)?

 

 

I think more than anything it's guilt that leads to Amir's actions. I believe that time when he set Hassan up with the watch was still in Amir's mind, and he cannot let go of that. So I do think more than anything else it's obligation that brings him back - he wants to set things right.

 

 

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.

[Medical Books]

I'm quite interested in science and health. All my chemistry study related books were read for university. They're up the attic at the moment so I don't have a list for you. I do plan on sorting them out. I own books on physical chemistry, biochemistry, mathematics, process control, organic chemistry, anorganic chemistry, practical lab information, history of chemistry, etc. I don't remember their exact titles and authors but if you're interested I'll go upstairs and make a list. I did read some medical books for my study, but they were borrowed and hence I don't own them, ie. I believe a book called Cell or Microbiology or something like that.Other than that I own a book on psychology which I really enjoyed reading (Richard Gross - Psychology). I also own quite a few books on autism (including biographies) for this subject interests me a lot. I also own some books related to health issues but I've only read some of them and so can't tell you about the ones I haven't read. For example I own a book about the Dutch health care system, it's on the TBR.My mum is a doctor, though as her job she doesn't see patients but instead she works for a government organisation helping lots of other health organisations with things. Her speciality is youth. She has a lot of medical books upstairs. I haven't read most of them, some of them are fairly technical.I might have to look up some of your recommendations, they sound interesting .

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.

[Robert Jordan - Wheel of Time series]

xMe too! I think it might make a good TV series.xxI'm not sure, that's difficult to say. There were a few in the middle I liked less, but most of them I really enjoyed reading. What's your favourite?

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

 

 

Rand stopped letting people push him around and became his "own person." I think it was in Towers of Midnight where Egwene is captured by the White Tower yet she displays just tranquility while being humiliated by the rest of the Aes Sedai - that was a nice chapter to read. I certainly would not have been able to remain calm in that sort of situation.

 

There's also a scene where Rand defeats an entire troll army by himself - it was nice to see his power shine through. And in the same way when Min is injured (I think by Padan Fain), you see a bit of Rand's anger.

 

Ooh, and when Rand meets his "father" somewhere later in the books, and his father sees what his son has become - yet he doesn't blame it on Rand, he goes straight to the Aes Sedai and sets them straight,

 

I will always prefer the first few books though, simply because Moiraine was in them, and Moiraine is the best.

 

 

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.

[Haruki Murakami]

I truly enjoyed IQ84.  I bought it and then read the reviews in retrospect of purchasing it as part of a price deal and was disheartened by what I had read particularly those that said you needed to be a seasoned reader of Marukami prior to coming to these books.  This was my first Marukami and I had debated buying other books first but then one night picked it up, read the first page and was sitting down before I knew it and within two weeks had the three read.  Whilst it does stretch over three books, there was this sublime element of description within the most mundane of actions of the characters that truly convey a true genius and there is much of that in the trilogy.  I tend to have a short attention span and I devoured those three books within a short time.  Perhaps as they are my first of his, they remain my favourite.

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.

[Movies You're Looking Forward to in 2014]

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:

 

[The last film you saw - 2014]

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.

[Robert Jordan - Wheel of Time series]

I read this series in fits and starts and out of sequence depending on what books the library had in at the time. I finally read most of it except the last book, which had not been written at that stage. I finally decided to get the entire series including the last book and finally read them in sequence from beginning to end including the last one. I have discovered to my mild horror that somewhere my reading interests have grown / changed / something and I can't read them. It's a bit because I really loved them, but coming back to them ... wow ... so something .... and I stlil haven't read the end! Aah well this is how the cookie crumbles sometimes.

 

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.

 

13 of which are in a carrier bag, waiting to be taken to a charity shop or other needy cause.

I did like them, but I won't read them again.

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.

[Books you should like...but don't]

that's because they are appallingly badly written - like unreadably, and espouse questionable values, maybe as you read more good writing you will come to see this. I think we may well see these books as the nadir of children's literature, or at least I hope so, because please don't let there be worse.

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.

 

That's why I don't read them. They are pessimistic, they assume mankind has some kind of built in death wish and can not do anything to stop our inevitable headlong rush to self-destruction. Sure they show some survival skills - but at what cost? They all focus on and around the strong preying on the weak and that 'might is right'. They fail entirely take into any kind of account our ability as a race to learn, something we have done consistently throughout recorded history, and to change our behaviour, another thing we have done at regular intervals throughout history. Yes you can read them as some kind of warning about what will happen if, but I personally am just not into reading a pessimistic, depressing, hopeless, point of view of the future.

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.

 

Because I don't like them. Nabokov - closet potential pedophile - it's suspected and debated enough for me to not want to read a word - don't care how brilliant he is, ethically I will not!

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?

 

Russians - long winded and depressing and never come to a point,

 

That is a very big generalisation to make.

Have you read any of the recent Russian literature?

[Books you should like...but don't]

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.

 

some authors I just flat out refuse to read regardless of how wonderful their writing is supposed to be

 

How come?

 

CuriousGeorgette, I think I love dystopian novels because, while they are often times bleak, they show the indomitable strength of the human spirit, and how we as humans are able to overcome, in the end, the most awful circumstances. That does give hope, IMO. But, each to their own kettle of fish.

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.

[David Foster Wallace]

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.

[Medical Books]

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.

[Robert Jordan - Wheel of Time series]

I love The Wheel of Time series too! That's a nice image, though I imagined her hair slightly darker. I loved the last book personally but I've heard more people were disappointed with the last book.

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?

[Discworld series by Terry Pratchett]

I'm reading the books in the Discworld order, so all the story lines are in order. I don't own Raising Steam, I'm waiting for the paperback release. I haven't yet read a book with Moist von Lipwig in it but I saw the film Going Postal which I loved. So I'm pretty sure I'll love the book Going Postal too.

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?

[What do you think about message in "how to win friends & influence people" ?]

Teams only work to a certain point, at which point there needs to be some one to make the final decision, carry the can, etc. Now a team might thrash out ideas, or whatever but ultimately the team will report to someone.

 

As for groups of friends starting a business - yeah sure - there is always one who is more the leader than the others, who drives things and ends up the CEO / major shareholder down the line.

 

I'm anti-teams except in limited circumstances because ultimately teams don't make decisions, individuals do. It's somewhat ra-ra kind of stuff which leaves me stone cold. All this company team building BS is truly a load of codswallop. Which would you prefer? Some one who is competent or some one who can play nice with others?

 

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.

[So Far So Good - 2014 Reading List]

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 do you think about message in "how to win friends & influence people" ?]

not to mention a rather modern 'we are all a team' nonsense.

 

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).

[What do you think about message in "how to win friends & influence people" ?]

However I think if you analyse it a bit more you will discover that you want a leader to be a leader, not just another one of the guys. If he/she was then why are they leading? Why should you respect their opinion and/or authority?

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.

 

There is always that small gap created by authority that can not and should not be closed. Ultimately the buck stops with the leader. They can be great, they can joke along with the best of them, they can and should be approachable and relateable but at the end, there is that small small gap that means if the smile comes off their face and they say 'ahem, come to order' you all listen, while if 'one of the guys' said it you'd all just carry on.

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.

[Libraries We Would Love To Visit]

Where are they?

And what's to be simple about the second one?

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.

[What do you think about message in "how to win friends & influence people" ?]

I think I understand what skprojekt is getting at - accepted as a leader yes - one of the guys no and that is right and good. There must always be that small divide that can not be crossed between a leader and those they lead. If you attempt to remove this divide you lose authority.

 

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.