review: a general theory of love
Only got half-way through before I gave up. They dispense with Freud very early on, but then seemingly rehash his theories. Apparently everything I do is a reflection on how well my mother parented me as an infant and toddler. And I am destined to only be attracted to people like my mother, unless I have years of talk therapy. And anyone who wasn’t perfectly raised, well, they should probably just be shot. It’d be kinder.
Also, the writing was terrible. If they wanted to talk about chaos theory, they introduced a water drop splashing around. But it’s not just any water drop. No, this one is from that fountain in the center of Rome, Trevi. And when they want to talk about how we can sympathize with someone else’s emotions, why look, it’s Archimedes and he just discovered buoyancy! Haha, now that, I can relate to.
Maybe I should read the rest of it, but there was only one thing I didn’t learn from introspection. I didn’t know that there is a physical seperation between the neocortex, limbic, and reptilian brains. I thought those were just metaphors. Neat! Also, doesn’t the idea of the self being composed of three parts echo Freud again?
Best thing about the book is the great cover design.
And working mothers should feel really guilty. Shame on them.