Skip to main content

Reading in 2017 Expanded My Mind, Heart, and Soul

I read 37(ish) books in 2017. As usual, they were a bit all over the place.

Some of the highlights:

- being diagnosed with anxiety and depression and realizing your codependent tendencies makes you seek out book help. I read Melody Beattie's work, including the classic Codependent No More and the newer Stop Being Mean To Yourself. I have another one still on my TBR pile. Related: Never Good Enough; Drama of the Gifted Child; The Wisdom of Depression; Potatoes Not Prozac.

- the business books included the fantastic Abundance by Peter Diamandis (older title) and Principles by Ray Dalio (new title). I'm enjoying branching out my business reading to forward-looking futurists. These are the folks who read science fiction as kids, made it come true, and are now looking ahead another forty years to see what will be next. 

- in the "make my life better" Dewey Decimal section: You Already Know What To Do, about tapping into intuition, was phenomenal and fell into my hands at the perfect time (towards the end of therapy). I've definitely been following my intuition more and feel much better about choices. Another good read was Pussy: A Reclamation. We all need to listen to our female intelligence more. Others in this category: The Happiness of Pursuit; Living Forward; Fearless and Free; Make Your Mark; The Power of Meaning; High Performance Habits.

- file under "Tim Ferriss": I read his own Tools of Titans, plus his recommended Vagabonding.

- I expanded my religious studies reading this year. Most exceptional was Four Testaments, which included foundations texts for eastern religions and a through introduction to Zoroastrianism. Every Judeo-Christian raised person should read about Zoroastrianism as it directly influenced the Hebraic history and Christian mythology. Related: A New Earth; How Philosophy Can Save Your Life; The Spirit of Zen.

- I reread Deborah Harkness' All Souls Trilogy (one of very, very few fiction works I have read multiple times) and that led me to read The Clockwork Universe, about how science bloomed during the 1600s, leading to thoughts which changed the world. Universe talks about England right after the time period of the Shadow of Night, the second in the All Souls Trilogy. It was neat to read about topics Harkness references as "coming." This also highlighted how out of practice I am in STEM areas, so I'm using the Brilliant app to brush up on my science and I read Richard Feynman's intro lectures to physics, Six Easy Pieces.

- The massive fiction tome this year went to an author I haven't read in 20 years: Neal Stephenson, and his collaboration with Nicole Galland, The Rise and Fall of DODO. If you're a fan of long, crazy, interwoven, sharp character-driven science fiction, I can't recommend this book enough. I've never read Galland's work before, so I can only surmise she kept the pace quicker than Stephenson's normal slog. But it was incredible; the ending was perfect and didn't make me sad (*cough*like The Night Circus*cough*). Also read: The Masked City; Furthermore; The Burning Page; Book Scavenger; A Conjuring of Light; Girl Who Drank The Moon

There were bits and bobs more, but those are the ones that stand out.

As usual, you can follow what I read over on Instagram, where I post shots and reviews in real time.

I'm tackling #theunreadshelfproject2018 for my reading this year, which means getting through the 55 backlog titles on my shelves. Wish me luck.


Comments

  1. UnknownJanuary 3, 2018 at 8:26 PM

    I loved reading your list! side note: I was an intern with Kathleen DesMaisons' when her book, Potatoes not Prozac was first out. You make my head spin in a good way : ) That sounds like 10 years worth of reading in my world! I appreciate the depth and breadth of your exploration and applaud you from the sidelines!!!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

High Art vs Low Art

“The masses seek distraction whereas art demands concentration from the spectator.” - -The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Walter Benjamin, 1936 Is there any more contentious question in the art world than the concept of “high” versus “low” I like venn diagrams. And shouldn't art really be in the middle?  art? Who gets to judge? What are the parameters in which to judge? There is no standard definition for either concept and personal explanations range from simple to incredibly complex. One common theory about how to explain the difference is high art is “popular” and low art is “unpopular”, that is, appealing (or not) to many people. This also links to another version of the difference: that high art fosters the widest connection between people while a smaller subsection enjoys low art. This is in direct contradiction, though, to the idea of low art being part of mass culture (raising yet another question of “is art culture” or merely a com...
Post a Comment
Read more

Pass the Collection Plate, Please.

Various sizes of buildings, with some sort of seating arranged in rows, facing a slightly raised platform. may have curtains around the platform. people --primarily men-- take the platform to orate to the audience seated before them. A plea for donations is made at some point, either before or after the show, which may have music and will definitely have directives masked as stories on how to be a human in this day-and-age. children will be seen, maybe, but definitely not heard. the men in charge will believe they have been given a special gift for leading this particular group of people. and the people, for whatever reason, will also believe this. and this group of people will believe that their building and person and each other are completely different and somehow better than all the other exact same groups around their town/city/county/state/nation. If theater wants to be treated as church and church as theater, then both are getting exactly what they have been setting up for the p...
Post a Comment
Read more

Death & The Theater

I was listening to a recent episode of the Tim Ferris podcast and the guest, happiness scholar Arthur C. Brooks, was discussing death meditations. And the little lightbulb in my brain turned on with the thought, "We need to talk more about death in theaters." I know, I know, that seems like an illogical statement because it feels like we're always talking about the death of theater. This whole summer has been filled with articles and op-eds from across the country about how large regional theaters are dying in major cities. But that's not the kind of death Brooks was talking about, and in reality, it isn't death these articles are complaining about, either: they are trying to stay alive in a “E’s just resting” fashion, to find some kind of life-support for the theaters, to keep them going, receive new money from new audiences or donors, new shows, new gimmicks to draw more or different people in the door. Anything to keep from dying. We don't talk about death...
Post a Comment
Read more