Haroun and the Sea of Stories - Salman Rushdie

I spent a lot of time trying to decide whether I should review this book or not. Being, to my opinion, such a bad book, I thought I shouldn’t even mention it. But people around me were very surprised and they kept saying “but I’ve heard it is very good” so I decided to write about it. I’m not sure if one could say that Rushdie is a very trendy author, the way Coelho is, but after reading some collegue’s reviews I ended up saying to myself that i should read one of his books. The book was simply there, so I decided to pick this one.

Haroun and the Sea of Stories is, as the title suggests it very clearly, just a story, longer of course, during which it seemed to me that Rushdie wrote after a pattern of this gender. The narrative thread is pretty simple: Haroun and his father, brilliant storyteller, live in a city so sad that it has forgotten its own name. Actually, the sadness exists also in the nearby towns and people pay a great deal of money to hear Rashid telling his wonderful stories. But when his wife leaves home, Rashid loses his gift and decides to break his subscription to the “story faucet”.

What comes next are the adventures of the two in “the land of stories”, where they find themselves in the middle of a war (which is not exactly a war) between storytellers and the people who want to shut them up by poisoning their ocean of stories. No matter how somber the last phrase may be, Rushdie doesn’t actually succeed to render this kind of somber atmosphere in the presentation of the situations, for everything seems to be a mere joke.

I imagine that Rushdie had noble intentions: indeed, people are sad, deeply immersed in their gloomy reality, and when it comes to stories, they say they are of no use. However, day dreaming and imagination are the antidote for this kind of gloomy fate. It’s obvious that if I accept this, I’m actually not part of their category. I would listen to a thousand stories, but only if they are good.

Haroun and the Sea of Stories, however, is a bad story. It is bad because Rushdie is trying too hard to create a fantastic world. There are too many “creatures”, machines, “processes that are too hard to explain”, each having a great amount of extraordinary features minutely described, up to the teeth. It’s like an “imagination” competition.

And speaking of saturation, imagine that a mechanical bird- important character- has a number of 30 lines; would you like to know how it feels to read “said Darr the hoopoe without moving its beak” for 28 times? Then please read this story- it’s a great opportunity to see for how long you can undergo this “technique”.

Written by Raluca

How to Develop Self-Confidence and Influence People by Speaking - Dale Carnegie

The two Carnegies

For those who don’t know, in the 1900 there were two famous Carnegies. Andrew Carnegie was the businessman that founded what is called today United States Steel Corporation, one of the greatest steel manufacturers in the world. Moreover, Andrew did a great job for the people around him, being involved in numerous philanthropic actions, especially concerning libraries and world peace.

And because the wish for “world peace” has become a cliché that is allowed only in the beauty contests, I am going to give you an example of Andrew Carnegie’s understanding of doing that. Wikipedia citation:
In 1898, Carnegie tried to give the Philippines its independence. As the end of the Spanish American War neared, the United States bought the Philippines from Spain for $20 million USD. To counter what he perceived as imperialism on the part of the United States, Carnegie personally offered $20 million USD to the Philippines so that the Filipino people could buy their independence from Spain.
The second, and the one who wrote the book announced in the title, is Dale Carnegie. By coincidence (or not!) Dale changed his name from Carnagey to Carnegie the same year that Andrew Carnegie, better known than him at that time, died. With or without the help of this trick related to his name, Dale Carnegie managed to become known as a writer and a “trainer” in the field of sales, personal development and public speaking. He is one of the few American authors that wrote about the personal growth so necessary to each of us without getting caught in the lame trap of the self-help books.

Public speaking

I suppose that few are the ones who imagine that speaking in front of a lot of people is easy, even if it’s about a speech, announcing the winners of a contest or just presenting some guest. However, until you actually try to do it, you have no idea how hard it is.

It is hard because you must remember all the words that you should have chosen carefully. It is hard because everyone is watching you and every hesitation or mistake will be taken into account. It’s hard because it’s not enough to remember your speech, but it is necessary to have a permanent control over your tone, your voice and over the moves you make on stage, whether they are voluntary or not.

It’s hard and Dale Carnegie tries and pretty much succeeds in giving pertinent advice in How to Develop Self-Confidence and Influence People by Speaking.
It is a well structured book that contains many examples of analyzed famous speeches.

I started reading the book with great expectations because I thought How to Win Friends and Influence People, also written by Carnegie, was brilliant; it was sold in 5 million copies and translated in 31 languages. My great expectations were met.

One can write tens or hundreds of books about public speaking so this one is far from being an exhaustive approach but it is certainly a five-star book, which I wouldn’t have wanted to miss. In the end, I would like to state here maybe the most important and full of meaning advice that Carnegie gives right at the beginning of the book: practice, practice, practice. No matter how much we read, no matter how much we rehearse, beside the theory, the best way to become really good is to go up on stage each time we have the possibility and start screwing up.

Written by Andrei

First break all the rules - Gallup Organization

  • Posted by Andrei on March 23rd, 2008 filed in management

One million employees and 80.000 managers in 400 companies were subject to a study. The result of this study is the exact same book I am talking about today.

Great managers break all the rules

This is pretty much the main idea of the book, and Gallup Organization, one of the biggest consulting firms in the management area, came up to it after no less than 25 years. To be honest, I’m actually afraid each time I open a management book because I’ve always had a problem with recipes and ideas that were already explored. Despite this lack of trust in recipes, I also hate to read that people who are considered experts in management do things in a completely different way than mine.

From this point of view, First break all the rules was an oasis of tranquility. Respected, loved and, last but not least, efficient managers break all the possible “rules”. People with experience in Human Resources know that there are people with a certain look in their eyes, who enter the room and one absolutely knows that they are the ones for the job, the ones that can make a difference.

I imagine that exceptional managers should be the same way, able of running systems by getting rid of prejudices and preconceived ideas, firmly denying deeply rooted procedures and standards, especially in multinational companies. First break all the rules is all about this kind of people.

You have the right to favour your employees. You actually must do it!

Fairness doesn’t mean equality between employees. The equity theory says that one should treat his employees fairly, not “evenly”! For some deserve more than others, because they offer more than others. The authors from Gallup Organization go even further by saying managers have the right to have their own favourite employees and repay them whenever they see it fit.

As another example, studies show that it is stupid to try to improve the weaknesses of the people you work with, and I totally agree. Why is it wrong? Well, you will find this out by reading the book, I have already told you too much. The only thing that I’m going to add, or better said promise, is that each idea that is mentioned in First break all the rules is seriously argued and statistically sustained.
In the end, I feel the need to say that I don’t agree entirely with all that is being said in the book and that I am not going to apply each “rule” found in there, just because other 80.000 managers do that. It wouldn’t even be in the spirit of the book to do that.

Written by Andrei

Time traveller’s wife - Audrey Niffenegger

Time traveler’s wife is an atypical love story between a librarian (Henry), who suffers from a genetic disorder that makes him travel through time and his wife (Clare), constrained to get used to his sudden leaves and long absences. Henry can’t control the moment of his leaving and has no idea when he will be back; in order to keep his calm, he runs.

When traveling, Henry can’t take anything with him. Thus, he awakes bare naked and starving and he finds himself in the need of learning various tricks in order to get food and clothes. He learns all these tricks from his elder self. Clare is a catholic artist who practically knew Henry all her life although they met in real time only at an adult age.

The relationship between the two can seem in the beginning rather crazy, almost like a joke. Henry’s departures are in no way a warranty of the marital lastingness. Waiting is one of the central ideas of this novel. Both characters wait for something to happen: Clare, like a modern Penelope, spends her time dreaming of her time-traveling husband, while Henry craves for a treatment, for a confirmation that his disease has a cure. The latter’s wishing to live like a normal human being makes him able to support a family from which he is absent, most of the time.
A series of misfortunate accidents arises from Clare’s need to love somebody, who would stay with her, a glimpse of Henry that would not leave her deserted, “insurance in case of fire, of flooding, divine will”.
Told from both points of view, the story reveals the effects of time traveling on unconditional love between the two and on their marriage. The characters do not reveal themselves gradually because there is no proper chronology of the events. Also, the discussions between teenage Clare and an older Henry are almost improbable. Moreover, the love feeling is said rather than being suggested and facts are depicted mechanically. The indisputable charm of the novel is given by the characters’ faith that they are meant for each other, that love is above any kind of limitations and even above death.

Written by Ioana

Sharp objects - Gillian Flynn

Sharp objects is, broadly, the story of a “crazy” family; a completely disfunctional family. And where exactly could this rich, deeply rooted family could express itself better than in a Victorian house in a small American town?

Let’s see with who we are dealing with. One will easily see I am not exagerating at all. A terrifying grandmother, already dead, but whose presence is still felt; the mother, who feels the urge to take care of her children, so that the permanent illness of her second daughter, dead when the story is told, is, in a very weird way, the exact situation she needed; the youngest daughter, a sociopat, almost a doll in her mother’s house, pathologically craving for lovea nd who becomes an alcoholic, a drug addict and a nimphoman and a complete dread for the geek girls in her school, that she publicly humiliates.

The other challenged family member is Camille, the narrator itself, who deals with her mother’s “treatment” even though this means her own emotional balance will be shaken. This lack of balance manifest itself through the notching of words on each centimeter of her body. The sharp objects avoid only her face, that part of the arm that gets out of the sleeve and a circle from her back.

In Chicago, away from her mother, Camille does not feel the need to hurt herself anymore. However, the dissapearance of a little girl in her home town, preceeded by the murder of another, determines the editor of the newspaper she works for to send her back there. It’s easy to imagine that things could only get worse.

“The investigation”, like various memories, are vividly exposed and their mix form a book of considerable length that I needed to end in a day and a half. But if you buy the book only considering the fact Stephen King said it scared the hell out of him (I’m actually starting to have serious doubts about him being the author of his horror books), it would be so wrong, I was not scared at all. What got to me was especially the great amount of hints, admirably inserted exactly when you thought you found the murderer. A fashion show of the skeletons in a little town’s inhabitants’ closets, on the catwalk of Camille’s mental sanity.

Oh, and yes! The ending…a book that catches you at the last pages is quite rare…

Written by Raluca

Cashflow Quadrant - Robert Kiyosaki

Kiyosaki writes worse than I could possibly write and he is far from considering himself a real writer. But his books, not a few actually, are valuable because they manage to change mentalities.

I know at least 4 people radically changed by Kiyosaki’s books

I also know a lot of multinational companies built upon the principles of the cashflow quadrant that Kiyosaki has promoted through all possible media. On the other hand, I know people who have taken the books I am talking about for a Bible and have narrowed their vision so much that they instantly deny any idea or concept that doesn’t exist in the American’s theory. I could say they live a form of fanatism.

Kiyosaki’s books are dangerous

As dangerous as a knife that you can use both to cut the bread or to kill. When I read Cashflow Quadrant, a few years ago, I had some revelations. I would exaggerate if I said they changed my life. Actually, books don’t change people, they merely show them that there are alternatives, but people are the ones who make the call. Even running away from responsibility is a choice in its own, but I am not writing about this today.

Cashflow Quadrant can be summed up to the simple scheme in the right where:
E = Employee
S = Self-employed (freelancer, dentist, lawyer or independent consultant)
I = Investor
B = Business owner

According to Kiyosaki everybody should want to be in the B quadrant because, from his point of view, one can manage to get faster from there to the investors’ quadrant. I found out (and it took me some time) that, first of all, not all people are made for the B quadrant and, second of all, not all the people wish to be there. But no matter if you want to be an employee, a self-employed or the owner of your own business, it is good to know what each means and which is the real relation between time and money.

We trade time for money

And this is the exact topic Cashflow Quadrant talks about. It is about the fact that the employee works 9 hours a day and he is paid with a certain amount of money, but if one day he decides that he doesn’t want to do that anymore, he permanently loses his income because he gets fired. The self-employed also trades time for money but if he finds himself one day not in the mood to get of the bed, he can do that without losing his income. The only disadvantage is that he will earn less that day (or during that period of time).

One becomes an investor the moment when, as an employee or a self-employee, has saved a serious amount of money which he tries to multiply, and the business owner…well, you can read about it in Cashflow Quadrant. That is if you have the guts.

Written by Andrei