Definitions worry me. So many complicated words and definitions should not be minimized to black and white print. Some words are seriously misrepresented in the dictionary. Introvert, for example. Regarding psychological inversion, Google defines an introvert as "one who focuses primarily on their own mind, feelings, or affairs." That just makes me sound selfish. In fact, Google goes on to define selfish as "concerned chiefly or only with yourself." Hmmmmmm . . . I get what you're saying, Google, and I just have to ask: where do you get off? Let us not forget that Google is very similar to ogle, which means (as we well know) "to stare at impertinently, flirtatiously, or amorously." You cyber slut.
It might be ridiculous to get so worked up over such a definition, but I believe in accuracy, and the Google definition for "introvert" is far from accurate. Let's consult a real dictionary. "Introvert: one whose personality is characterized by introversion." I hate when dictionaries do this! Using another form of the word in the definition is not a definition; it's a pansy-ass cop out. Still, I'm committed enough to this blog post to also look up introversion and get a complete definition. "Introversion: the state of or tendency toward being wholly or predominantly concerned with and interested in one's own mental life." Merriam-Webster just made my list.
Is this seriously an accepted definition? The introverts are just selfish, caustic individuals who cannot see beyond their own experience even if they wished to? Because I am going to follow in Luke's example and throw the flag up on that one. Bullshit.
That's a prime note to end on, but I'm going to ruin it because I have more to say. Google, Merriam-Webster, and all others who buy into this official definition crap, I just want to clear a few things up. Being an introvert does not make a person asocial. In fact, introverts can be quite adept in social situations. Introversion is not synonymous with shyness or awkwardness. Simply put, introverts are drained by being with people and energized by being alone. It's a different mentality, but in no way does it ill-equip someone for life, and introverts can enjoy the company of others just as much as an extrovert can sometimes enjoy spending time alone.
There. I've said my piece. And, just to punctuate my point, I'm going to throw the flag on Google and Merriam-Webster again. Bullshit.
4.23.2010
4.16.2010
More Book Reviews
More of my condescending reviews. Got some good 'uns today.
Cranford by Elizabeth Gaskell
Elizabeth Gaskell has style, wit, and grace in the face of charged social issues, both in the delightfully repressive 1800s as well as now. Cranford is no different even though it has a different ring to it. Unlike North & South, Wives and Daughters, and Mary Barton, Gaskell focuses on a different crowd and practically removes romance from the equation. Her focus is on elderly, single women who rule the small town of Cranford with an iron fist. The humor is satirical and winsome, and the plot unfolds naturally with surprising grace. So long as 19th century vocabulary and elderly British women don't annoy you, I recommend this one. 4/5 stars.
Desert Solitude by Edward Abbey
Ever been to Arches National Park? If not, you should go. Now. Drop whatever mind-addling exercise you are doing and go. It's only a few hours away, and you deserve a break every once in a while. Just don't bring Edward Abbey's Desert Solitude (inspired by Arches) with you. He manages to make it try and a little laborious to read. I quite like Abbey in general. He's an interesting man, and The Brave Cowboy is my favorite Western novel. In fact, that one is worth dropping everything to read. This one? Not so much. 2/5 stars. (Don't tell Rutter.)
The Book Thief by Markus Zusak
This book was a surprise. I started reading it, expecting your basic WWII fall out story with a wonderful literary twist, but this book is different. For starters, it's told from the perspective of DEATH, who is fascinated by this girl he sees when he collects her brother. She displaces her sense of lost by stealing books. It's a little difficult to get into Death's head, though, so I'm deducting points for presentation. 4/5 stars.
The Mortal Instruments by Cassandra Clare
We all have our guilty indulgences. Mine, as many know, are fluff books which I read only for entertaining dialogue and ridiculous characters. Even I had to be a little convinced to read these books. The series is a trilogy (City of Bones, City of Ashes, City of Gold) exploring a fantastical world that plays with demons, angels, family, werewolves, vampires, etc. Yes, I was skeptical. The Stephanie Meyer endorsement on the color dramatically injured the case. However, despite all of this, I read these. Voraciously read them. These are fun, fun books, and if you enjoy a good plot, interesting characters, thwarted teen love, and near death experiences, read them. If you don't . . . yeah, really don't. You'll hate them, but I give it 3/5 stars in the normal world, and 5/5 stars in the fantasy world.
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime by Mark Haddon
This book follows an autistic boy who is trying to unravel the mystery of his neighbor's dog's death. As the mystery deeps, it starts to raise questions about his mother's death years before. The hook in this is how the boy, Paul, tries to figure out his world and compute his discoveries. I loved it. It was clever and fresh and endearing. Read this. It's wonderful. 5/5 stars.
Cranford by Elizabeth Gaskell
Elizabeth Gaskell has style, wit, and grace in the face of charged social issues, both in the delightfully repressive 1800s as well as now. Cranford is no different even though it has a different ring to it. Unlike North & South, Wives and Daughters, and Mary Barton, Gaskell focuses on a different crowd and practically removes romance from the equation. Her focus is on elderly, single women who rule the small town of Cranford with an iron fist. The humor is satirical and winsome, and the plot unfolds naturally with surprising grace. So long as 19th century vocabulary and elderly British women don't annoy you, I recommend this one. 4/5 stars.
Desert Solitude by Edward Abbey
Ever been to Arches National Park? If not, you should go. Now. Drop whatever mind-addling exercise you are doing and go. It's only a few hours away, and you deserve a break every once in a while. Just don't bring Edward Abbey's Desert Solitude (inspired by Arches) with you. He manages to make it try and a little laborious to read. I quite like Abbey in general. He's an interesting man, and The Brave Cowboy is my favorite Western novel. In fact, that one is worth dropping everything to read. This one? Not so much. 2/5 stars. (Don't tell Rutter.)
The Book Thief by Markus Zusak
This book was a surprise. I started reading it, expecting your basic WWII fall out story with a wonderful literary twist, but this book is different. For starters, it's told from the perspective of DEATH, who is fascinated by this girl he sees when he collects her brother. She displaces her sense of lost by stealing books. It's a little difficult to get into Death's head, though, so I'm deducting points for presentation. 4/5 stars.
The Mortal Instruments by Cassandra Clare
We all have our guilty indulgences. Mine, as many know, are fluff books which I read only for entertaining dialogue and ridiculous characters. Even I had to be a little convinced to read these books. The series is a trilogy (City of Bones, City of Ashes, City of Gold) exploring a fantastical world that plays with demons, angels, family, werewolves, vampires, etc. Yes, I was skeptical. The Stephanie Meyer endorsement on the color dramatically injured the case. However, despite all of this, I read these. Voraciously read them. These are fun, fun books, and if you enjoy a good plot, interesting characters, thwarted teen love, and near death experiences, read them. If you don't . . . yeah, really don't. You'll hate them, but I give it 3/5 stars in the normal world, and 5/5 stars in the fantasy world.
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime by Mark Haddon
This book follows an autistic boy who is trying to unravel the mystery of his neighbor's dog's death. As the mystery deeps, it starts to raise questions about his mother's death years before. The hook in this is how the boy, Paul, tries to figure out his world and compute his discoveries. I loved it. It was clever and fresh and endearing. Read this. It's wonderful. 5/5 stars.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)