Insulting...to the reader
924198
Silly ludicrous story.  I don't want to list any spoilers but it's really hard to read a book with a frankly impossible scenario as the basis for the novel.  One could argue that it's " sci-if meets conspiracy thriller" but its just too ridiculous; even if the bad guys win, they actually lose.  If you had wealth and power, why would you destroy everyone and everything around you so you could rule over the ruins?
2789884
A waste and an insult. The author spends thousands of words stating the obvious: that people are maxed out.
This laborious introduction is a complete insult to busy readers who don't have the time to slog through lots of excess verbiage.
Note to Mr. Allen:

GET TO THE POINT!
LEARN HOW TO WRITE!
STOP WASTING OUR TIME!

I wouldn't pay this guy a nickel to consult at my company.
He obviously has no respect for people's time.

This book is a farce
2548718
I was cruising along really enjoying these essays when I happened upon one where the author uses the "C" word liberally. My enjoyment came to a sudden halt as I wondered why this sophisticated gay male, who professes to have fine sensibilities, would alienate and disrespect his female readers so aggressively. Surely a writer of his intelligence and with his talent could have conveyed the ironies he was reaching for (and failed to reach) in a multitude of more creative and effective ways. I imagine he would agree with me. But in case he doesn't get it: "Mr. Sedaris, the "C" word is one of the nastiest and disrespectful words you can use in jest or in serious tone. It aggressively denigrates women, and the men who use it. Including well known authors. Shame!"

Amazon, if you are reading this, please refund the cost of this book.
533733
I have been marginally aware of G. K Chesterton, first through Robert W. Smith's works, and then later, discovering that a major character in the Sandman series by Neil Gaiman (Gilbert, aka Fiddler's Green) had been patterned after him. I have been reading a number of Infidels (Paine, Ingersoll, and Voltaire), and so am somewhat familiar w/this style of writing, and have somewhat become a fan of it.

 Unfortunately, when an author begins with attacking any rational and skeptical critic, insulting their intelligence, and inferring they are drooling idiots, then I am afraid my mind shuts down.  As Ingersoll observed, since the Church has been deprived of its instruments of torture, only one weapon is left, and that is slander (paraphrase). To call any skeptic illiterate, or accuse them of what is essentially brainlessness, is but a sugarcoated, sarcastic version of the ad hominem attack (and if the reader actually INVESTIGATES the writings of these skeptics, past and present, they will find that they are INDEED literate, and intelligent). He says this, this one about the early matriarchies: "matriarchy was simply moral anarchy, in which the mother alone remained fixed because all the fathers were fugitive and irresponsible." Who said this? Unknown. Sources cited? None. Moral Anarchy? I am not an advocate of political correctness, as I see it as subliminal censorship, but this coupled with his derisive trash about Asians, comparing Herodotus to a Chinaman, and saying the Asian is barely human (paraphrase)? And please, spare me the nonsense of societal antipathy. Bigot and sexist.  He goes on to attack the evolutionist, making fun of forensic science (but excuses for G.K: he had no idea how useful this is in reconstructing a human being in today's CSI labs). Again, the worst sort of Antinomianism, covered with flowery prose. Some of his imagery is wonderful; the conclusion was quite beautiful. But this errant nonsense about the 5 deaths of the Church? Please. As if the Spanish (or Germans) were abandoning their crosses during the French revolution. The Vatican was on the verge of closing its doors? And this idiocy about instinctive worship? Again, spare me. A child isolated, raised by wolves, NEVER starts praying: indeed, said child will behave as its environment dictates. His history is unsound; his psychology is simple egomania (this is how I would be, ergo, everyone else will be); he glosses over the glaring contradictions in the Bible with barely a blurb, simply dismissing them with a poetic hand, never addressing them; nor does he address the rivers of blood that wash up on the feet of Christ. The early church didn't survive simply because it was the best: it survived by crushing the opposition, and gaining a foothold in the Roman Empire via Constantine (who was, irony of ironies, an Arianist on his deathbed). And the wonderful rubbish of martyrdom: while there were those who died in the name of their Lord (RIP), the Christians only endured 12 years of actual persecution; the Romans were remarkably tolerant of other beliefs, and after Justin's martyrdom, an entire craze sprang up in the Christian community where members ACTUALLY WENT OUT OF THEIR WAY TO GET MARTYRED. If C.S Lewis converted due to this long-winded, sophistic diatribe, then perhaps I shall skip reading anything by him. Words are but words, and rhetoric, however lofty and poetic, are not evidence of anything except that people will glorify the speaker if the words serve their best interest.

In conclusion: I have read many apologists, and thus far, they have failed the litmus test: that of logic.
402375
I am one of those readers who starts and book and finishes it no matter what I think of it. I don't think I've ever said this-and I read a LOT-I actively disliked this book. Lord knows I tried. Yes, there are interesting historical bits about London, Collins, Dickens, and lots of tidbits of an interesting time in literature. That being said, I don't remember the last time I've so disliked characters. If the authors point was to show how despicable these two icons of British literature were then he's done a magnificent job. By the end of the book I would have gladly shot Wilke Collins-in fact, the author seems to press the point that he WANTS us to hate this narcissistic, hateful, deceitful lout. How on earth did this get published?

Not an enjoyable read. I would not only not recommend it-I would actively dissuade people from bothering with it at all.
1228002
This book is so horrible it's not worth reading to the end. It's preachy, whiny, heavy handed, judgmental, and intolerably one dimensional and trite. Who publishes this garbage? There will be a verified purchase next to my review because my husband purchased this for me along with another Pekkanen novel, but he knows now not to buy anything this shallow author writes again.

We get it. The author is a Democrat. She loves Planned Parenthood, hates Sara Palin, and stereotypes Republicans. Guess what? I don't care. I'm Canadian and have no interest in having some American writer shove her sappy sermons thinly disguised as fiction down my throat. Is this supposed to be a novel or a piece of propaganda? And doesn't the author realize that the housewife who murdered a pedophile wouldn't have had to do that if her political party hadn't gotten rid of capital punishment since the guy would have been put to death for his crimes?

And talk about overly dramatic nonsense! Facebook stalking? Is the author 12 years old?  The characters come across as immature, vain, shallow, and just plain ridiculous.  The worst part of this book, however, is the anti-Semitism on page 251. Nice bigotry there, Pekkanen.

How about the stupid murder plot? A pedophile gets run over by a distraught mother, but there's no thought to the storyline. A pedophile leaves his house unlocked? And anyone can just walk right on in? A friendly neighborhood where everyone is up in everyone else's business doesn't notice the guy run over on his own driveway? No screams for neighbors to come running out to? No one heard him calling out to the mother who killed him? The cops wouldn't check everyone's tires? And notice the murderess had new tires on her car, purchased immediately after the guy gets killed? Come on, cops aren't stupid. This case would be ridiculously easy to solve.

This is not a book for the thinking person. If you want to read quality fiction, check out Barbara Pym or Dorothy Whipple. Pekkanen's stuff is about as worthwhile as the doggy poop her book focuses so much on. NOT recommended.
1728475
Offensive and demeaning to both men and women.  As well as ridiculous.  What 21st century group or individual would be so stupid as to believe that a 17th century contract of sexual ownership of the first born female of every generation in perpetuity would be enforceable?  No matter how much money and influence the "owners" might have? And then to describe the public sexual abuse and humiliation of that unlucky female by a group of men, ending only in her inevitable death within a very few years, a fate that had befallen every one of her predecessors, including her mother?  An insult to readers.  I recommend that you not open yourself to that insult.  Cross this book of your list.
3048687
I don't know which I hated more: the insipid plot or the obnoxious, condescending tone of the author. Ms. Mendelson appears to be quite proud of the breadth of her knowledge as she never misses an opportunity to pepper the narrative with long, tedious paragraphs on subjects that don't always have direct relevance. Perhaps for showcasing purposes, she felt the need to include them?  Also disturbing are the main character's shopping expeditions for caviar, imported cheeses and chocolates, and greens "flown in that morning", etc. while she and her husband are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. And taking this to an even higher level of asurdity, she claims that their dinner guests (academics and preachers) expect such fare! The ending is ridiculous - and one that will have some NYC natives rolling on the floor laughing. On a final note, if you live in the suburbs, you will be livid when you read Ms. Mendelson's depiction of them. Truly, I find it difficult to understand how this book was published and that it received any praise at all. Had I been an editor, it wouldn't have seen the light of day.
3063241
This "How to" book is insulting to anyone's intelligence. Of course you have a beginning, a middle, and an end...duh! The "How to" part is short and uninformative...and that's the best part of the book! The two short stories of hers she includes as examples are terrible, possibly the worst erotica I've ever read. Instead of being a turn-on it's more of a turn-off. It sounds like she really, really hates women. Sorry I wasted the money.
323275
Every negative stereotype about white people is brought up and chuckled over in this book. Where Williams ostensibly brings up perceived white shortcomings in order to dispel the myths, she actually seems to be gleefully reinforcing them. By quoting the opinions voiced in her focus groups (and, more often, by family and friends) she discusses how flat white people's butts are, how thin their lips are, how early they show their age. Where she brings up perceived black shortcomings, she turns them into points of pride, or at least explains them in sympathetic terms.
She obviously is using this forum to air her own opinions and suspicions. She quotes her niece as saying that the American government is "importing white people" from Eastern Europe, then does nothing to support or refute the statement. She raises the claim that the anti-fur movement in America only came about because "black women were finally able to afford minks," then quotes her mink-owning sister. She hints strongly that Nielsen doesn't allow blacks to participate in their ratings system (she says she's never met a black family with a Nielsen box, but how many white families has she met with one?  Nielsen families are specifically instructed never to divulge that they are Nielsen families) and makes the arrogant and erroneous assertion that the reason there aren't more black people competing on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" is because they "have better things to do than learn trivia." Then she says she believes that show and others like it are rigged: "They're not about to let one of us show them up on national television and leave the audience with the impression that a black person could actually be smarter than a white person," Williams writes. Who are "they"?  And why would anyone listen to the author of that sentence about a better understanding between blacks and whites?  I was terribly disappointed by this book.  I certainly hoped for more.
Williams' obvious racism aside, the style of writing is slapdash, with conversational ejaculations thrown in for effect. It seems to be the work of a public speaker, not a journalist. Grammar and spelling mistakes abound--throughout the text the past tense of the verb lead is spelled lead, a mistake that Spellcheck wouldn't catch. Where was her editor?  I'm only sorry the lowest rating I can give is one star.  This book deserves none.
918899
Absolutely, the worst. I am an avid reader of interracial romance and this book was the absolute worse. The author should take pointers from the writing of other interracial authors to see how it is done. Please someone ask the publisher to scrap this book and ban it from future sale. Yeeech!
2471202
Let's not forget to mention obnoxious and toxic too. "Can it be that the actress reading this audio memoir hates this woman as much as I hate listening to her read it," I wondered halfway through Chapter 1? "Do I continue to listen long enough to learn if this person ever demonstrates any redeeming character traits?" I think not. And please consider that purchasing this enables and encourages more of the same and don't do it. Check it out of the library instead if you just gotta.
2868028
The sentences are confusing, in that you don't know where the main character is, or what is happening to him. Also, unnecessary blasphemy is offensive, juvenile, and shows no respect for the reader's beliefs, and sensitivities. It also shows a like of writing quality displayed in the older, more reverent authors, but is sorely lacking in today's writers. It's time authors learned to keep their anger, and rebellion to themselves, and not to offend their readership. Heck, if they were writing to the Islamic market, they'd be killed for this mistake! I on the other hand respectfully suggest that they keep their beliefs, or lack thereof to themselves, and to cleanup their writing style so as not to offend their readers!
 I Tossed this book in the garbage, after reading, not one, but several blasphemies in the prologue, itself!
 A note from a faithful reader; cleanup your writing style, and omit offensive language from your books!
1050172
First, I must start by saying I am not a holy roller, but the author even has me rolling my eyes.
I am a third of the way through this book and her mocking and trivialization of the Christian ideas of Jesus and God are getting old and stale.  I get it.  You think religion is outdated and childish.  Does this mockery need to take place page after page -or the entire section you specifically stated was to mock modern views of God- necessary in order to put your experiments into place?
  I understand the concept, but her delivery is rather arrogant.  Some of us evidently are too under-developed and unscientific to let go of our childish views of religion having a place in our life.  The author took a path not necessary to get her point across and it results in a rather immature tone.
3377417
I read this book at the behest of a co-worker. She hyped it up as a humorous, quick and easy read.

About 50 pages into the book, I got offended by the main character who was a "white woman invading a black man's gym." I marked the page and continued to read hoping this would be the last time I read such a remark. Drudging on, the main character approached a man she was to append for skipping bail. The character says "Let's face it, how many bearded fat white men lived in this neighborhood?" I would have stop reading the book then. Unfortunately, I promised my co-worker to finish the book. So, I kept reading and highlighting. Other references included characters talking "ghetto" and traveling in areas where she was not welcome by her skin color. In the end, I marked over 10 despairing references toward Blacks and Latinos.

This book is horrible. And, someone of us wonders why discrimination still exists. "Leisure" reading like this still perpetuates hate for a good laugh.
570742
I would rate this worse, but would not want to give the author the satisfaction of being hated. Good points, smart man, but thin gruel served over many pages here. Gives a few anti fragile examples, half of which are mythical creatures (seriously); repeats himself, contradicts himself, calls names like a five year old (I know you are but what am I), and all in all seems very unpleasant to be around - since this is a family newspaper, I'll call it ego instead of master debating. Glad it's a book I can put down instead of being at a cocktail party with him, being put down. Perhaps some editor should have put this book down (but humanely). Seems like a good editor would have helped. Btb, I like his aphorisms web link; that is about the right style and dose for this guy's medicine.
4660892
A book about manners by Bill O'Reilly, who sexually harasses women is not ok. Please don't enable this crass publication with your dollars.