...
Show More
I'm so frustrated by wading through this sea of mud that my review will be bullet points.
* 35% longer than it should have been
* desperately needs editing for clarity
* conversational tone muddies the concepts and slows the flow
* topically gallops in a dozen directions
* the scientific support is at turns glossed over or excessively technical without purpose
I could go on, but I'll spare you. It reads as if it wasn't written, but dictated, by someone who loves the sound of his own voice -- Gilderoy Lockhart teaching a sophomore psych seminar. There is good science, but you have to wade through a hip-deep bog of verbiage and mentally restructure the book as you read it.
* 35% longer than it should have been
* desperately needs editing for clarity
* conversational tone muddies the concepts and slows the flow
* topically gallops in a dozen directions
* the scientific support is at turns glossed over or excessively technical without purpose
I could go on, but I'll spare you. It reads as if it wasn't written, but dictated, by someone who loves the sound of his own voice -- Gilderoy Lockhart teaching a sophomore psych seminar. There is good science, but you have to wade through a hip-deep bog of verbiage and mentally restructure the book as you read it.